RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-02897
		INDEX CODE:  131.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) prepared for the Calendar Year 2002A (CY02A) Captain Central Selection Board be voided and retroactively grant her promotion to the rank of captain effective the release date (7 May 2002) of the CY02A results.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The “Do Not Promote” (DNP) recommendation was based on an unsigned and unfinalized referral OPR dated 21 February 2002.  She received the PRF on 25 February 2002.  The finalized OPR is dated 26 April 2002.  This OPR is not a referral OPR.  Her senior rater also admits basing the DNP on verbal information from persons who have admitted under oath they were under undue command influence and were forced to issue a referral OPR to prevent her promotion.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is serving on extended active duty in the grade of captain effective and with a date of rank (DOR) of 1 July 2003.

Applicant was considered and not selected for promotion to the grade of captain by the CY02A (19 February 2002) Captain Selection Board.  She received a “Do Not Promote This Board” PRF for the board.

Applicant was considered and selected for promotion to the grade of captain by the CY02C (3 October 2002) Captain Selection Board.

OPR profile since 1998 follows: 

           PERIOD ENDING          EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL 

			 9 Dec 98	Training Report (TR)
			 7 Nov 99	Meets Standards (MS)
		    #  31 May 00				(MS)
			20 Dec 01				(MS)
		   ##  30 Jul 02				(MS)

# Top Report on file for the CY02A Board
## Top Report on file for the CY02C Board

EXAMINER’S NOTE:  The OPR rendered for the period 17 September 2001 through 20 December 2001 was initially drafted as a referral report before the contested PRF was prepared, but was finalized as a “Meets Standards” report after the CY02A Captain Promotion Board convened on 19 February 2002.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPEB recommended denial.  They indicated the applicant states she received a copy of her CY02A PRF, with a DNP recommendation, and a memorandum from her senior rater advising her of the DNP recommendation.  Because the central selection board had already convened, she was not afforded the opportunity to write to the central board.  Because the Directed by Headquarters (DBH) performance report was not received in time for the February 2002 captain promotion board, the applicant was granted a special selection board (SSB) in May 2003.  The applicant’s record was complete and she was given the opportunity to rebut the DNP PRF and she submitted a letter to the board.  The applicant was non-selected from the May 2003 SSB.

In the USAFA/IG letter dated 27 June 2003, the investigation did substantiate “some undue command influence was present concerning the complainant.”  However, the IG questioned the “significance since the referral OPR in question did not become an official record.”

Senior raters are charged with writing PRFs and may use a variety of sources, to include suggestions from subordinate supervisors--“Senior raters may consider and/or include information from other reliable sources…”  It is apparent in the senior rater’s 1 August 2003 letter that he believes he considered reliable information to make his assessment and stands by the DNP recommendation.

The evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPO recommended denial.  They indicated they reviewed AFPC/DPPPEB’s advisory and have nothing further to add.

The evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 19 December 2003, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

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’s contentions are duly noted; however, after a thorough review of the evidence submitted with this appeal, we are not persuaded the contested PRF is either in error or unjust.  Essentially, the applicant asserts that a draft referral Officer Performance Report (OPR) was used as the basis for her “Do Not Promote” (DNP) Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) and therefore, the PRF should be removed from her records.  We note the applicant appealed to the Inspector General (IG) who substantiated some of her claims.  However, the IG questioned the significance of the most serious charge of undue command influence since the referral OPR did not become a matter of record.  In any event, since the finalized OPR closing 21 December 2001 was not received by the central board in time for the CY02A board, the applicant was provided promotion consideration by a Special Selection Board.  At that time, the applicant was given the opportunity to write to the selection board rebutting the DNP PRF.  She was not selected for promotion by the selection board.  The Board notes the statement from the senior rater which indicates after a careful review of the facts in this case and contact with the rater and additional rater during the period in question, he decided the PRF is true and accurate and will remain a “Do Not Promote This Board” recommendation.  The senior rater further indicates it was his assessment the applicant was barely meeting standards as an Air Force Lieutenant and was not ready at that time to assume the responsibility commensurate with the rank of a captain.  In the Board’s opinion, the applicant has not established that the senior rater’s assessment of her performance at the time the report was rendered was in error or unjust.  Senior raters write PRFs and may use a variety of sources to include suggestions from subordinate supervisors.  They may also consider and/or include information from other reliable sources.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board finds no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

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-2003-02897 in Executive Session on 24 February 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 24 August 2003, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPEB, dated 3 November 2003.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 1 December 2003.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 December 2003.