RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-00758
                       INDEX CODE:  131.00
                       COUNSEL:  COL GEORGE E. DAY,
                                     USAF (RET)

                       HEARING DESIRED:  NOT INDICATED

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  14 SEPTEMBER 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.    His Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) for Calendar  Year  2002
(CY02) be changed to a “Definitely Promote” (DP).

2.    He receive promotion consideration by  Special  Selection  Board
(SSB) for the CY02 CSB or he receive a direct promotion.

3.    His pay files be corrected accordingly.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The Deputy Chief of Evaluation Programs Branch admittedly factored him
on the weight control program at the 2002 Chaplains Colonel Management
Level Review (MLR) when in actuality he was not on the weight  control
program.  He also states the Air Force Deputy Chief of Chaplains  made
a derogatory comment against African American chaplains which resulted
in the chaplain system sending minorities to  senior  service  schools
and  promotable  assignments  with  little  regard  to  their   actual
performance.  He believes that  this  reverse  discrimination  against
white officers created an institutional bias  toward  minorities  over
whites in the Chaplain Corps.

In  support  of  his  appeal,  applicant  and  counsel  submitted   a
statement,   character   letters   and   AF   IMT   3538   (Retention
Recommendation Form).

Applicant's complete submission,  with  attachments,  is  attached  at
Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving on active  duty  in  the  grade  of
lieutenant colonel (Lt Col).

The applicant was considered and not selected  for  promotion  to  the
grade of colonel by the CY02B, CY03B, CY04C and CY06C Colonel CSBs.

The applicant did not file an appeal under the provisions of Air Force
Instruction (AFI) 36-2401, Correcting Officer and Enlisted  Evaluation
Reports.

Applicant’s OPR profile as a lt col is listed below.

                 PERIOD ENDING          OVERALL EVALUATION

                        25 Apr 99            Meets Standards
                        25 Apr 00            Meets Standards
                        25 Apr 01            Meets Standards
                        25 Apr 02            Meets Standards
                        25 Apr 03            Meets Standards
                         1 Apr 04            Meets Standards
                         1 Apr 05            Meets Standards
                         1 Apr 06            Meets Standards

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPPE recommends the requested relief be denied.  DPPPE states
the applicant’s PRF was never downgraded to a “P”  recommendation  nor
was there any  compromise  of  the  MLR  process.   His  records  were
presented to a panel of three line general officers and  two  chaplain
colonels along with 13 other officers from different Management Levels
across the Air Force.  The records were scored based on merit and each
panel member reviewed the Record of Performance (ROP), input from  the
respective senior rater by reviewing the PRF submitted by  the  senior
rater and duty qualification and history brief which is a synopsis  of
an officer’s career.  There were two “DP” allocations  to  be  awarded
and the applicant was not in the top two after the records were scored
and the order of merit was completed and therefore a “P” was given  to
the applicant and his PRF was marked accordingly.

AFPC/DPPPE evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPO recommends the requested relief be  denied.   DPPPO  states
the applicant received a fair consideration for a “DP”  recommendation
and that the weight  management  program  was  not  a  factor  in  the
promotion process.  DPPPO further states  the  results  of  the  CY02B
board were based on  a  complete  review  of  the  applicant’s  entire
selection  records,  assessing  whole  person  factors  such  as   job
performance, professional qualities, depth and breadth of  experience,
leadership, and education.

Although an officer may be qualified for promotion, he may not be  the
best qualified of other eligible officers competing  for  the  limited
number of promotion vacancies in the judgment of a selection board.

Furthermore, to grant a direct promotion would be unfair to all  other
officers who have  extremely  competitive  records  but  did  not  get
promoted.

AFPC/DPPPO evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR STAFF EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded  to  the  applicant
and counsel on 27 April 2007, for review and  response.   As  of  this
date, no response has been received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.    The applicant has exhausted all remedies  provided  by  existing
law or regulations.

2.    The application was timely filed.

3.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of an error or an injustice.  After a thorough review of
the evidence of record  and  the  applicant’s  submission,  the  Board
agrees with the opinions and recommendations  of  the  Air  Force  and
adopts their rationale as the basis  for  their  conclusion  that  the
applicant has failed to sustain his burden of proof that he  has  been
the victim of an error or an injustice.  The applicant  is  requesting
his records be changed to reflect he received a “DP” and consideration
for a direct promotion  or  an  SSB.   The  Board  found  no  evidence
submitted or in the applicant’s records that led them  to  believe  he
did not receive full and fair consideration for a “DP” during the  MLR
process.  It appears to the Board that the  records  presented  before
the promotion board were reviewed  based  on  the  applicant’s  entire
selection record.  Therefore,  in  the  absence  of  evidence  to  the
contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief
sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that
the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the
application will only be reconsidered upon  the  submission  of  newly
discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2007-00758 in Executive Session on 8 August 2007, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. James W. Russell III, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member
                 Mr. Clarence R. Anderegg, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 Jan 07, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Officer Selection Brief.
      Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPE, dated 2 Apr 07.
      Exhibit E. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPO, dated 17 Apr 07.
      Exhibit F. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Apr 07.




                             JAMES W. RUSSELL III
                             Panel Chair