RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01225
		INDEX CODE:  111.01, 131.01
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His AF Form 77, Supplemental Evaluation Sheet, prepared for the period 4 Dec 95 through 13 Apr 96, be included as part of his permanent record.

2.  It appears he is also requesting that he be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by Special Selection Board (SSB) for the Calendar Year 2002B (CY02B) lieutenant colonel selection board.  

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The lack of inclusion of the Letter of Evaluation (LOE) in his Officer Selection Record (OSR) could have had a negative impact on the scoring of his records. Inclusion could have had a positive impact on his score.

In support of his request, applicant provided a copy of the LOE and his OSR contents.  His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant was appointed a captain, Reserve of the Air Force, on 9 Jun 89 and was voluntarily ordered to extended active duty on that same date.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of major, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 1 Jan 98.

He was considered and not selected for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the CY02B Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board, which convened on 12 Nov 02. 

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPE recommends denial.  DPPPE states that the AF Form 77 is used by raters to substitute for missing evaluations, to cover voids in performance records, and to provide continuation sheets for referral reports.  Policy clearly states that an LOE is used by raters to document performance to be included on a future OPR.  In this case, information from the AF Form 77 was provided to his rater and included in the 27 Mar 96 OPR.  There is no basis to file the LOE and doing so would give him an unfair advantage among his peers.  The DPPPE evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPO recommends the application be denied on the basis of timeliness.  If considered on its merits, DPPPO concurs with the opinion of DPPPE and recommends denial.  The DPPPO evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 11 Jul 03 for review and comment within 30 days.  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 error or injustice that would warrant corrective action.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility that the standards of Air Force policy were properly applied in this case and that favorable consideration of the applicant's request would give him an unfair advantage over his contemporaries.  Therefore, we adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  In the absence of 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-01225 in Executive Session on 13 Aug 03, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 3 Apr 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPE, dated 19 Apr 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 30 Jun 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Jul 03.