RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-02210
		INDEX CODE:  131.00
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be retroactively promoted to the grade of colonel based upon the position vacancy he occupied during the October 2001 promotion board; or in the alternative, he be considered for promotion to the grade of colonel by Special Selection Board (SSB) for the Fiscal Year 2002 (FY02) Air Force Reserve Line and Nonline Colonel Selection Board.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His Officer Preselection Brief (OPB) did not include Air War College in the Professional Military Education section.  His duty title as Inspector General (IG) was in conflict with other documents and may have been missed by the board.  His Promotion Recommendation form (PRF) stated Deputy Commander as his duty title.  While he was a Deputy Commander at the time the PRF was written, he was actually the IG when the promotion board met.  The PRF ranked him 5th of 22 Definitely Promotes (DPs) in a field of 65 lieutenant colonels.  The promotion board results should show that most of the lower ranking DPs were actually promoted.  

His last Officer Performance Report (ROP) lists his duty title as Deputy Commander.  While the ending date is correct, when combined with the PRF, it is unlikely that the board knew he had been the IG, an 0-6 position, for a month.  

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant was appointed a second lieutenant in the Air Force Reserves on 1 Jun 77.  He has been progressively promoted to the grade of colonel, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 30 Jan 03.  Applicant was considered and not selected for promotion to the grade of colonel by the FY02 Line and Nonline Colonel Selection Board, which convened on 15 Oct 01.  He was considered and selected for promotion to the grade of colonel by the FY03 Air Force Reserve Line and Nonline Colonel Selection Board, which convened on 21 Oct 01.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/DPB recommends denial.  DPB states that there is no position vacancy promotion opportunity to the grade of colonel in the Air Force Reserves.  Promotion to the Reserve grade of colonel is not vacancy based as promotion to lower grades can be.  Selection board members use the "whole person" concept when evaluating an officer for promotion to the next higher grade.  The applicant's Officer Selection Brief (OSB) was produced "in-board" on 19 Oct 01.  The OSB contained completion of Air War College.  Additional relevant information became available to the selection board and an updated OSB was created.  This OSB was provided to the board members for use in their evaluation of the applicant's potential to serve in the next higher grade.  The OSB shows the applicant was assigned as Inspector General, 12 Sep 01, and was awarded a primary Air Force specialty code (PAFSC) of S87G0, Inspector General.  His most recently completed OPR and PRF reflected a duty title of Deputy Commander.  The OPR and PRF were both completed prior to his change of job to IG.  Between the start of his new assignment on 12 Sep 01 and the board convening on 15 Oct 01, there was insufficient time to require an OPR

The OSB contained accurate information concerning his completion of Air War College, his new duty assignment, duty history, and AFSC.  His OPRs and PRF also reflected accurate information concerning the applicant, based upon the knowledge of his senior rater and the assignment the applicant occupied at the time those documents were prepared.  No error was present in the applicant's record when considered; therefore, there is nothing to appeal.  The DBP evaluation is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant provided a recount of his career highlights and states that his record before the FY02 board reflected an officer that met and excelled in every criteria of objective measurement.  He understands that "filling all squares" will not guarantee a promotion, just as failure to do so, does not guarantee one will be passed over.  Under the "whole person concept" his record, when objectively evaluated, contains unique and valuable achievements few, in any, officers can cite, and outright reveal a professional who is competitive at the very highest levels.  

Senior leadership informed him there was a quota on the number of DP recommendations that could be awarded.  Based upon his ranking of 5th overall, which was the top 8 percent of all officers in XXth Air Force receiving a DP, he assumed his selection for colonel was a virtual certainty.  He has since been informed that senior raters had no constraints on the number of DPs they could award. Had he known this, he would have written a letter to the board President to ensure his qualifications for advancement were readily discernable.  His complete submission 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.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  His contentions are duly noted.  However, we do not find his uncorroborated assertions sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force.  We agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility, and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  We note that the OSB that was prepared for the selection board accurately reflected his completion of Air War College.  We are not persuaded by his assertions that the disparity between his current duty title and the duty title reflected on his OPR and PRF had the potential to negatively impact selection board members.  Evidence has not been presented which would lead us to believe his record was inaccurate when considered by the selection board in question or that he was denied fair and equitable promotion consideration.  Therefore, in the absence of persuasive 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-2003-02210 in Executive Session on 11 Sep 03, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Jun 03 w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, ARPC/DPB, dated 18 Jul 03.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Jul 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, dated 5 Aug 03.