RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  03-00748
		INDEX CODE:  131.01
		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be selected for continuation by the Calendar Year 2002B Major Selective Continuation Board.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The continuation board in question did not have enough information to make an objective judgment as to his potential for continuation.  The Article 15 in his record is not representative of his character or potential.  He has served the Air Force faithfully for 16 years with stellar performance and dedication.  He makes no excuses for his lack of judgment, which resulted in the disciplinary action.  He was adequately punished for his actions and he was retained on active duty.  He accepted non-judicial punishment under counsel that he would be allowed to remain until retirement eligible.  He is completely qualified to continue as a valuable member of the Air Force.  He states that he has the unwavering support of his losing and gaining commanders and the AETC Director of Personnel.  They are the most qualified sources to provide an accurate assessment of his potential and value to the Air Force.

In support of his appeal, applicant provides a personal statement, letters of support and a copy of his OPR for the period ending 3 September 2002.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant is currently serving on extended active duty in the grade of major.  He has a mandatory date of separation of 31 July 2003.  

He was selected for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the CY00A.

On 17 October 2001, applicant receive nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 for making an official statement to a base wildlife officer, which he knew was false and for having an inappropriate physical relationship with the wife of another officer.  

On 23 October 2001, the Article 15 was placed in his Selection Board Folder.

On 24 April 2002, the Secretary of the Air Force removed his name from the promotion list.

He was considered and not selected for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the CY02B Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board.  Based on his second nonselection for promotion, he was considered and not selected for continuation by the CY02B Continuation Board.  He has an established date of separation as 31 July 2003.  At that time he will have 17 years and 7 months of active duty, 5 months short of the sanctuary zone and will be ineligible for retirement.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPO reviewed this application and recommended denial.  Although the applicant's commander and other officers who have served with the applicant support continuation, the applicant's record supports the continuation board's decision to not offer him continuation. 

The DPPPO evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant reviewed the evaluation and states that his commander has allowed him to enter into training under the assumption that his continuation will be approved.  He is disappointed that AFPC did not support his request and he does not agree with their assessment.  He believes that the support and recommendations from his commanders should be adequate justification for his continuation.

He also states that when he was issued the Article 15, he took responsibility for his actions, apologized, repented and stepped up for a hard to fill remote assignment.  He did everything possible to put this event behind him.  He is a better officer, husband, father, and Christian because of this past incident.  His integrity, dedication, loyalty, and professionalism are intact.  The applicant’s rebuttal is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________
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 an injustice to warrant granting the applicant's request for continuation.  We are not condoning his misconduct; however, we note that the applicant has paid a severe price for his transgressions and, unlike many others, does not deny his behavior.  In our view, the Article 15 has served its intended purpose, and the applicant is mature and realistic enough to accept, albeit regretfully, its affect on his career.  As a result of being twice nonselected for promotion, he was eligible for continuation but was also not selected.  This seems unduly harsh and unjust.  We note the OPR following the referral report in which he received a three-star general endorsement.  His former additional rater and gaining commander strongly urge this Board to grant the applicant's request for continuation.  In view of the support from his superiors, we recommend that he be selected for continuation as an exception to policy.  

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that he was selected for continuation by the Calendar Year 2002B Major Selective Continuation Board.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application, in Executive Session on 21 March 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

All members voted to correct the record.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 20 Feb 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 7 Mar 03.
    Exhibit D.  Applicant’s Letter, dated 14 Mar 03.

                                   
                                   Panel Chair