RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01182
		INDEX CODE:  131.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His record, to include his master’s degree in Aeronautical Science, be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by Special Selection Board (SSB) for the Calendar Year 2000A (CY00A) Selection Board.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

A four-year assignment to a location without the degree program he was enrolled in, coupled with deployments and temporary duty assignments, interrupted his studies and prevented him from completing a master’s degree before his primary lieutenant colonel promotion board.  Moreover, the Air Force conducted two lieutenant colonel promotion boards in 1999, 19 April and 30 November, decreasing the normal interval between boards.  This accelerated his primary board from Fall 2001 to November 2000 and made it impossible for him to complete the final two courses prior to the board.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a personal statement, an Active Duty Officer Verification Brief, Extended Campus Unofficial Transcript of Academic Record, and other documentation.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving on extended active duty in the grade of major.

Applicant was considered and not selected for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the CY00A (28 November 2000), CYO1B (5 November 2001), and the CY02B (12 November 2002) Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards.

OPR profile since 1995 follows: 

           PERIOD ENDING          EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL 

			 9 Jun 95              Meets Standards (MS)
			15 Feb 96				(MS)
			15 Feb 97				(MS)
			15 Feb 98				(MS)
			15 Feb 99				(MS)
			15 Oct 99	Training Report (TR)
		     # 15 Feb 00				(MS)
		    ## 15 Feb 01              				(MS)
		   ### 15 Feb 02				(MS)

# Top Report on file for the CY00A Board
## Top Report on file for the CY01B Board
### Top Report on file for the CY02B Board

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPO recommended denial.  They indicated that the applicant requests that a SSB view his record as though he had received his master’s degree prior to the board.  However, AFI 36-2501, paragraph 6.5.2, states “Consider the records of officers as they would have appeared to the original board had the officers been properly considered.”  The master’s degree, which he earned in 2001, was not a matter of record for the CY00A board and therefore does not merit SSB consideration.

Additionally, the only way to update a master’s degree on an Officer Selection Brief (OSB) is for the officer to provide the Air Force Institute of Technology (AFIT) with an original, official transcript, or to request that his educational institution forward an official transcript to AFIT, as AFIT is the only agency authorized to update academic data.  Since this area holds the officer’s two highest degrees and reflects the “year” (in this case, 2001) for the most recently completed academic degree only, the SSB board members would be able to identify the consideree meeting the board.

Regarding applicant’s letter to the CY00A board, the board members were aware of his circumstances and his delay in completing his master’s degree.  In submitting such a letter the applicant made a conscious decision to create a historical document, which remains a part of the record that met the CY00A board.  The only time a letter is withdrawn from the historical record is when the subject matter of the letter is subsequently altered through appeal action.  For example, a letter speaking to an Article 15 that is subsequently overturned.  Otherwise, the letter should stand as an historical document for the CY00A board, as it was part of the deliberation process for that board.

The evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the evaluation and indicates that he was at a competitive disadvantage with his peers for not having completed an advanced degree prior to the CY00A board, which was his primary board, resulting in non-selection for promotion.  He earned an advanced degree in May 2001 despite a four-year delay due to assignments that prevented him from completing the degree earlier.  Despite the delay he planned to complete degree requirements before his primary board, anticipating a board in the Fall of 2001.  Lieutenant Colonel promotion boards were accelerated with the addition of a second board in 1999 (CY99B), moving his primary board up to November 2000.  The net result of assignments and board compression is he effectively lost five years in which to complete his degree program.  Although he met subsequent boards with the degree completed, he was considered “above-the-zone” which carries a negative connotation and makes the probability of promotion remote.  He believes in the core value of Service Before Self to the extent that it was detrimental to him professionally.  Had he taken care of himself, he would have requested an assignment to a location with the university he was enrolled in so he could have completed his degree without interruption.  Instead, he did not question ”the needs of the Air Force” when he accepted an assignment at Scott AFB.  He desires the opportunity to compete with his peers at the CY00A board with the inclusion of his master’s degree in his records.

Applicant’s response, with attachment, is at Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________

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 injustice.  The applicant argues essentially that due to circumstances beyond his control, to include the fact that his in-the-promotion zone (IPZ) consideration was earlier than he anticipated, he was unable to complete his master’s degree and therefore his record was at a disadvantage when he was considered for promotion.  While it could be argued that the applicant’s record would have been more competitive had he received his master’s degree before the selection board, we do not believe that this is the central issue of this case; rather, it is whether or not an error or injustice has occurred.  We believe that the applicant’s argument that he did not receive fair consideration has no merit.  In this respect, the applicant’s records were not incomplete when they were considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel because he was not awarded his master’s degree until May 2001, well after the CY00A selection board convened.  We note that the applicant wrote a letter to the board president addressing the issue of his master’s degree; therefore, the board members would have been aware of his enrollment in an advanced education program and why he had not completed the requirements for his degree.  Further, with respect to the applicant’s IPZ board, while this board may have convened earlier than he anticipated, he has not established that he was treated any differently than others similarly situated individuals.  It must be noted that promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel is highly competitive and while we can understand the applicant’s disappointment in not being selected for promotion, we cannot determine with any certainty why he was not selected for promotion.  However, on the basis of the evidence presented, we find no error or injustice and therefore, we find no compelling basis upon which to recommend granting the requested relief.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of an 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-2003-01182 in Executive Session on 30 July 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 31 March 2003.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 28 May 2003, w/atchs.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 June 2003.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 25 June 2003, w/atch.