RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-00849
		INDEX CODE:  111.01

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Education/Training Report (TR), rendered for the period 2 Jun 92 through 27 Sep 93, be replaced with the revised TR provided, which include squadron commander comments on his performance as a flight commander.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His performance as a flight commander is not documented on any training reports or Officer Performance Reports (OPRs) due to an oversight during the base closure process at George AFB, CA.

In support of his request, applicant submits a copy of an AF Form 77 (Supplemental Evaluation Sheet), rendered for the period 2 Jun 92 through 20 Aug 92, and a revised TR.  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 1 Jun 83, the applicant was commissioned a second lieutenant in the Regular Air Force.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of lieutenant colonel, effective and with a date of rank of 1 Oct 99.

Applicant's profile for the last 10 reporting periods follows:

		Period Ending	Evaluation

		     20 Nov 91	Meets Standards (MS) - Captain
		#     1 Jun 92	     MS
		* ## 27 Sep 93	Education/Training Report (TR)
		###   8 Jun 94	     TR
		      8 Jun 95	     MS - Major
		      4 May 96	     MS
		+     6 Jun 97	     TR
		++    6 Jun 98	     MS
		      6 Jun 99	     MS
		     14 May 00	     MS - Lt Col

 *  Contested TR

# Top report at the time he was considered and nonselected for promotion Below-the-Promotion Zone (BPZ) to major by the CY92C Central Major Selection Board, which convened on 7 Dec 92.

## Top report at the time he was considered and nonselected for promotion Below-the-Promotion Zone (BPZ) to major by the CY93B Central Major Selection Board, which convened on 6 Dec 93.

### Top report at the time he was considered and selected for promotion In-the-Promotion Zone (IPZ) to major by the CY94A Central Major Selection Board, which convened on 22 Aug 94.

+ Top report at the time he was considered and nonselected for promotion to lieutenant colonel by the CY97C and CY98B Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards, which convened on 21 Jul 97 and 1 Jun 98 respectively.

++ Top report at the time he was considered and selected for promotion to lieutenant colonel by the CY99A Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board, which convened on 19 Apr 99.
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPPE recommends the application be denied.  DPPPE stated that the proposed Training Report (TR) does not mention the applicant performing as a flight commander, but embellishes on information previously addressed.  Based on the comments in Section III, Other Comments, of the contested TR, the rater did obtain information about the previous assignment and it was considered when making the initial assessment and commented upon in the TR.  The retrospective views of facts and circumstances, 7 years after the closeout of the AF Form 77, Letter of Evaluation, do not overcome the presumption that the original TR is correct and do not add new information that was not previously known or addressed in previous evaluation reports.  The HQ AFPC/DPPPE evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 19 April 2002 for review and response.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D).
_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

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

2.  The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case.  However, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden that he has suffered either an error or an injustice.  In view of the above and absent sufficient evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.
_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES 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 this application in Executive Session on 5 June 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 Feb 02, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPE, dated 10 Apr 02.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Apr 02.