AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 
DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-02209 
 
COUNSEL:  NONE 
 
HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

IN THE MATTER OF: 
   
   
   
   
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:  
 
He receive a direct promotion to the grade of colonel/O-6. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
He was recently passed over for promotion to O-6 due to severe 
extenuating  circumstances.    His  passover  stemmed  from  his  lack 
of  Professional  Military  Education  (PME)  commensurate  with  his 
rank.  His lack of PME had a detrimental effect on his promotion 
recommendation  form  (PRF).    He  received  a  “Promote”  instead  of 
“Definitely  Promote.”    He  was  ranked  #1  among  his  peers  seven 
times,  received  the  Airman’s  Medal,  the  Montana  Medal  of  Valor 
for  heroism,  and  received  gubernatorial  recognition  for 
leadership/excellence  by  two  governors.    There  is  no  doubt  in 
his mind had he completed PME he would be an O-6. 
 
The severe extenuating circumstances began just before he pinned 
on O-5.  A pedophile stalked his teenage daughter, gained entry 
into  their  home  and  violently  raped  her.    He  then  posted  the 
photos  of  the  crime  on  the  internet.    Over  time,  he  was 
arrested,  brought  to  trial  and  convicted.    The  conviction  did 
little  to  aid  the  family’s  suffering.    His  daughter  lost  all 
self-esteem and withdrew from life completely.  His teenage son 
began  to  experiment  with  drugs.    The  entire  family  blamed 
themselves.    What  they  lived  through  for  four  years  is  beyond 
comprehension.  PME or any other form of homework was simply out 
of  the  question.    His  main  focus  was  holding  his  family 
together. 
 
Despite  everything  he  went  through  at  home,  he  personified 
service  before  self.    He  continuously  performed  ahead  of  his 
peers.    He  believes  he  has  proved  beyond  a  shadow  of  a  doubt 
that he is O-6 material.  He asks the Board to excuse his lack 
of PME based on these severe extenuating circumstances and award 
his promotion to O-6. 
 
In  support  of  his  appeal,  the  applicant  provides  a  personal 
statement and AF Form 709, Promotion Recommendation.   
 
The  applicant’s  complete  submission,  with  attachments,  is  at 
Exhibit A. 
 
 

 
 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
The applicant is a lieutenant colonel in the Regular Air Force.   
 
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained  in  the  letter  prepared  by  the  Air  Force  office  of 
primary responsibility which is at Exhibit C.   
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
ARPC/DPSOO  recommends  denial  of  a  direct  promotion  to  colonel. 
The applicant has two non-selections to the grade of colonel by 
the CY10C P0610C (In-the-Promotion-Zone - IPZ) and CY11B P0611B 
(Above-the-Promotion-Zone  -  APZ)  colonel  central  selection 
boards. 
 
The  results  of  the  P0611B  APZ  Colonel  CSB  were  based  on  a 
complete  review  of  the  applicant’s  entire  selection  record, 
assessing  the  whole  person  factors  such  as  job  performance, 
professional  qualities,  depth  and  breadth  of  experience, 
leadership  and  professional  development.    The  Board  is 
instructed  that  “while  developmental  education  should  not  be  a 
pass-fail  item  in  your  assessment  of  an  officers  potential  for 
promotion,  the  AF  considers  it  important  and  encourages  all 
officers to complete it.”  Although the officer may be qualified 
for  promotion,  he  may  not  be  the  best  qualified  of  eligible 
officers  competing  for  the  limited  number  of  promotion 
vacancies.    A  direct  promotion  would  be  unfair  to  all  other 
officers who have extremely competitive records but did not get 
promoted.   
 
Eligible  officers  meeting  a  board  have  the  option  to  submit  a 
letter  to  the  board  president  addressing  any  matter  of  record 
concerning  themselves  that  they  believe  is  important  to  their 
consideration  for  promotion.    The  applicant  wrote  a  letter  to 
his  P0611B  APZ  Board  explaining  the  severe  extenuating 
circumstances, but not to his P0610C IPZ Board.   
 
Congress  and  the  Department  of  Defense  have  made  it  clear  that 
errors ultimately affecting promotion should be resolved through 
the  use  of  special  selection  boards.    After  careful  review  of 
this application, the most fair and practical remedy is to grant 
a special selection board by the P0610C Colonel CSB to allow the 
applicant  the  opportunity  to  write  a  letter  to  the  board 
explaining the extenuating circumstances that led to his lack of 
PME. 
 
The complete DPSOO evaluation is at Exhibit C. 
 
 
 
 

 

2 

 
 
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
A  copy  of  the  Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the 
applicant on 2 July 2012, for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit  D).    As  of  this  date,  this  office  has  received  no 
response. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
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 to warrant 
his direct promotion to the grade of colonel.  In this regard, 
the Board observes that officers compete for promotion under the 
whole person concept whereby many factors are carefully assessed 
by selection boards.  An officer may be qualified for promotion 
but,  in  the  judgment  of  a  selection  board  vested  with  the 
discretionary  authority  to  make  the  selections,  may  not  be  the 
best  qualified  of  those  available  for  the  limited  number  of 
promotion vacancies.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence that 
he would have been a selectee had his folder contained a letter 
to  the  Central  Selection  Board  (CSB),  we  believe  that  a  duly 
constituted  selection  board  applying  the  complete  promotion 
criteria  is  in  the  most  advantageous  position  to  render  this 
vital  determination,  and  that  its  prerogative  to  do  so  should 
only be usurped under extraordinary circumstances. 
 
4.  Notwithstanding  the  above,  sufficient  relevant  evidence  has 
been  presented  to  demonstrate  the  existence  of  an  injustice 
warranting  the  applicant’s  promotion  consideration  by  a  Special 
Selection Board for the Calendar Year 2010C (P0610C) Colonel CSB, 
provided he submits a letter to the P0610C CSB.  In this respect, 
we agree with the Air Force office of primary responsibility that 
the  most  fair  and  practical  remedy  is  to  grant  an  SSB  with  the 
applicant being provided an opportunity to write a letter to the 
Board  explaining  the  extenuating  circumstances  that  began  just 
before  he  pinned  on  O-5.    Accordingly,  we  recommend  the 
applicant’s records be corrected to the extent indicated below. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: 
 
The  pertinent  military  records  of  the  Department  of  the  Air 
Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that, provided 
he submits a letter to the Calendar Year 2010C (P0610C) colonel 
Central  Selection  Board  (CSB),  his  record  be  considered  for 

 

3 

promotion  to  the  grade  of  colonel  by  a  Special  Selection  Board 
for the P0610C CSB. 
 
______________________________________ _________________________ 
 
The  following  members  of  the  Board  considered  AFBCMR  Docket 
Number  BC-2012-02209  in  Executive  Session  on  18  December  2012, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 

 
All  members  voted  to  correct  the  records,  as  recommended.    The 
following  documentary  evidence  pertaining  to  AFBCMR  Docket 
Number BC-2012-02209 was considered: 
 

Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 21 May 12, w/atchs. 
Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. 
Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOO, dated 20 Jun 12. 
Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 Jul 12. 

 
 
 

, Panel Chair 
, Member 
, Member 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
Panel Chair 

4