RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  01-00970
		INDEX CODE:  111.01, 131.01
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He receive Special Selection Board (SSB) consideration by the CY99A (19 April 1999) (P0599A) central lieutenant colonel selection board with an amended Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) which accurately reflects his achievements and potential.  

By amendment at Exhibit H, applicant requests the PRF be voided and replaced with the reaccomplished PRF he provides.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The CY99A central lieutenant colonel selection board results are unjust due to three factors: improper assignment at the National Air Intelligence Center (NAIC) through an abuse of the personnel system by senior leadership; an unfair performance assessment based upon career field prejudice rather than job performance; and a failure to include pertinent information on his PRF.  

As a major in the developmental engineering career field, he was improperly assigned to NAIC in a captain’s billet to circumvent Air Force engineer entitlement limits.  Senior leadership failed in the duty to the Air Force to properly identify all officers with the demonstrated ability to serve in the next grade, but instead took action only to ensure the promotion of fellow intelligence officers.  Their indifferent and lethargic efforts on behalf of non-intelligence officers were not based upon an assessment of each individual officer’s potential, but was a group assessment based upon stereotyping in clear violation of Air Force personnel directives.

When he reported to NAIC in June 1996 and began working in the Integrated Air Defense System (IADS) his duty title was Chief of European and American IADS Analysis, but it was instantly apparent this was not an appropriate level of responsibility for a major.  He raised the issue with his branch chief who admitted the job was intended for a captain, but since no captains had volunteered, they had reclassified the position as a major’s billet hoping a senior captain would then be enticed to volunteer.  However, when no captain volunteered, AFPC then volunteered a major.  The branch chief indicated that this was done to circumvent the entitlement limits; engineer captain billets at the time were filled at a 50 percent, whereas major billets were filled at 90-100 percent.  For these reasons, which have nothing to do with job requirements and having everything to do with falsely obtaining scarce personnel resources, he was assigned to NAIC in what should have been a captain’s billet.  This abuse of the personnel system placed him in a very disadvantageous position to compete fairly with his peers.  He went from the responsible position of deputy program manager to the less responsible position of analyst not because he had failed to perform at a high level as a program manager, but because NAIC leadership abused the personnel system to obtain an unfair allocation of engineers.

The consistent non-selection of non-intel majors is indicative not of poorly performing officers, but either the fact that positions themselves do not possess sufficient inherent levels of responsibility to compete on a level playing field with other majors throughout the Air Force, or NAIC does not prepare a competitive promotion package in the form of the Officer Performance Report (OPR) and the Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF).  What is unconscionable is the fact the NAIC commanders never took responsibility for improving upon the board results of the non-intel officers.  There should have been aggressive fact-finding, which would have uncovered improper job responsibility levels, unenthusiastic OPRs, and an overly restrictive PRF writing process. 

When he did not receive a DP, his PRF was not modified to indicate “if I had one more DP I would have given this officer the DP.”  Inclusion of this statement would have been a more accurate reflection of truth, and would have significantly improved his chances for selection to lieutenant colonel.  He understands it is the commander’s prerogative to include this statement, but it makes no sense to lobby for an officer, then not include it.  High impact statements that could not be included because of the overly restrictive rules at NAIC again placed him at a significant competitive disadvantage compared to other officers.  The omission of these statements again illustrates no effort from NAIC leadership on behalf of its non-intel officers.  

He understands that in this competitive environment there are more deserving officers than there are slots.  He is also aware it is the board’s judgment and not others who matter in promotion, and not everyone can be selected.  However, the circumstances of his tenure at NAIC, the abuse of the personnel system, the improper systematic discrimination against non-intel officers, and the submission of a PRF did not accurately reflect his achievements at the CY99A lieutenant colonel selection board.  

In support of his request applicant provides a personal statement and copies of his PRFs for both his major and lieutenant colonel board.  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Data extracted from the military personnel data system (MilPDS) indicates the applicant’s Total Active Federal Military Service Date as 25 January 1983.  He is currently serving on active duty in the grade of major, with a date of rank and an effective date of 6 February 1995. He is currently assigned as Chief, Advanced Launch Systems, ---- AFB, --.  

He was considered and not selected for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the P0599A, P0599B, P0500A and P0501A lieutenant colonel selection boards.  On 12 November 2002, applicant was considered for the P0502B lieutenant colonel selection board.  

The following is a resume of the applicant's OPR profile since his promotion to major:

		PERIOD ENDING		OVERALL EVALUATION

			 9 May 00		MEETS STANDARDS (MS)
			15 May 99		MS
			15 Jan 99		MS
			29 Apr 98		MS
			29 Apr 97		MS
			29 Apr 96		MS
			29 Apr 95	    	MS

The applicant received an AF Form 709, Promotion Recommendation Form, for the P0599A Selection Board and received an overall recommendation of “Promote.”  Additionally, the applicant’s OSB indicates he was awarded two Meritorious Service Medals, a Defense Meritorious Service Medal, an Air Force Commendation Medal, a Joint Service Commendation Medal and two Air Force Achievement Medals.  The applicant currently has an established date of separation (DOS) of 30 April 2007.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPE recommends the application be denied.  DPPPE states that the applicant has no support from his senior rater.  Despite their effort to get the applicant to provide senior rater support for his contentions, none has been provided.  DPPPE agrees that management level should not prohibit the use of reliable information in PRFs.  However, the applicant has no replacement PRF to consider.  Without any proposed replacement PRF, or the required recommendation from the senior rater and Management Level President, DPPPE cannot recommend favorable consideration.  DPPPE evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPASA recommends the application be denied.  DPASA states that the position selected for applicant was a valid and vacant major’s 62E3A position.  The applicant was fully qualified for the position.  At the time, NAIC was authorized four 62E3A majors and had 2 assigned.  The applicant was a non-volunteer for the position at NAIC, but was selected as the most eligible and qualified officer.  DPASA evaluation is at Exhibit D.

AFPC/DPPPO concurs with the findings in both the AFPC/DPPPE and AFPC/DPASA advisories and has nothing further to add.  Since those advisories recommend denial, SSB consideration is not warranted. DPPPO evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 23 October 2001, applicant requested his application be temporarily withdrawn (see Exhibit G).

On 13 April 2002, applicant requested his case be reopened.  Applicant now requests that his PRF be replaced with a revised PRF, which he provides.  The basis of his request is that the original PRF, which met the CY99A board, was created through a flawed process and did not accurately reflect either his personal performance or future potential.  

The applicant’s rebuttal with supporting statements from his rating chain, including the senior rater and MLR President, is at Exhibit H.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

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

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  In support of his contention, the applicant provides credible evidence from his rating chain, to include the Management level Review (MLR) President, which clearly indicates that his PRF did not accurately portray their assessment of his promotion potential.  Given the equivocal support from the senior rater and having no reason to doubt his integrity in this matter, we believe that the applicant was improperly disadvantaged due to the exclusion of factual data which resulted in an inaccurate assessment of his performance and potential.  Therefore, we recommend approval of the applicant’s request that his PRF of record be declared void and replaced with the reaccomplished PRF.  

4.  We have no way of knowing the impact the correction to the records proposed above would had on the applicant’s promotion opportunities had his record been correct when presented to the CY 1999A Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board.  In order to afford the applicant full and complete relief and to resolve any doubt in this matter, his corrected record should be referred to a Special Selection Board.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that the Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF), AF Form 709, prepared for the Calendar Year 1999A (CY99A) Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board, be, declared void and removed from his records and the attached reaccomplished PRF be accepted for file in its place. 

	It is further recommended that he be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for the CY99A Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application, AFBCMR Docket No. 01-00970, in Executive Session on 26 November 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, received 9 Apr 2001, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPE, dated 11 Oct 01.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPASA, dated 26 Apr 01.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 11 Oct 01.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Oct 01.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, Applicant, dated 23 Oct 01.
    Exhibit H.  Letter, Applicant, dated 13 Apr 02, w/atchs.

                                   
                                   Panel Chair

AFBCMR 01-00970

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

	Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

		The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to XXXXXXXX, be corrected to show that the Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF), AF Form 709, prepared for the Calendar Year 1999A (CY99A) Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board, be, and hereby is, declared void and removed from his records and the attached reaccomplished PRF be accepted for file in its place. 

		It is further directed that he be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for the CY99A Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board.

                                                                                     
                                                                                     Director
                                                                                     Air Force Review Boards Agency

Attachment:
AF Form 709