RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:				DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-01421
INDEX CODE:  131.03
	XXXXXXXXXXXXX				COUNSEL: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

	XXXXXXXXXXXX					HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

His records be reconsidered by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for the CY03B Colonel (Chaplain) Central Selection Board. 

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The board membership for the CY03B Colonel (Chaplain) Central Selection Board was not properly constituted in that an African-American member was knowingly and willfully kept from participation by command in contravention of regulation.  

In support of his application, the applicant’s counsel provides a statement, two supporting statements from a retired chaplain, and documentation concerning selection of board membership. The applicant’s complete submission with attachments is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

According to the military personnel data system, the applicant is currently serving on active duty with a Total Active Federal Military Service Date of 24 March 1982 and a projected date of separation of 31 March 2010.  His current grade is lieutenant colonel with an effective date and a date of rank of 1 April 1999.  The following is a resume of the applicant’s performance ratings:

	PERIOD ENDING				OVERALL EVALUATION 

	09 Jul 92 (Major)					MS
	03 May 93							MS
	30 Jun 94							MS
30 Jun 95							MS
	30 Jun 96							MS
30 Jun 97							MS
27 May 98							MS
27 May 99 (Lt Col)					MS
27 May 00							MS
27 May 01							MS
27 May 02							MS
27 May 03							MS

The applicant was considered and nonselected for promotion to the grade of colonel by the Colonel (Chaplain) Central Selection Board, which convened on 27 October 2003.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPB recommends denial of the applicant’s request for SSB consideration.  DPPB addresses only the portions of the application pertaining to promotion boards.  DPPB states the composition of the CY03B board was in compliance with statute, directives, and policies.  The board consisted of six officers (board president and five board members), including an African-American general officer.  

It is DPPB’s opinion that the promotion board results from 1989-2002 to support the applicant’s claim of the existence of long standing systemic discrimination against African-American chaplains, has no bearing on the case at hand. DPPB states that board membership is a requirement set forth by law and Air Force policy and is not determined by previous promotions.  The Secretary of the Air Force (SecAF) directs promotion boards to be conducted in a color-blind manner.  No race information is presented to board members for their deliberative use.  In an event such information is included in a member’s performance report, or other sanctioned documents, board members are directed by the SecAF to focus on the quality of the record.  In his Memorandum of Instructions, the SecAF directs board members to use the whole-person concept to assess the quality of officers under consideration.  Board members are also instructed that equal opportunity is an essential element of the Air Force’s selection system, and that their evaluation of all officers must clearly afford them fair and equitable consideration.  Preferential treatment of any officer or group of officers is not permitted.  Therefore, board members are tasked to choose the best-qualified officers for promotion regardless of race.  

DPPB disagrees with the applicant’s contention that “control of board membership is potentially control of promotions.”  DPPB states that internal procedures used by functional managers to determine board membership have no bearing on the outcome of promotion boards, so long as the board membership is in compliance with statue and directives, which in this case the board met.  In addition, promotion board procedures preclude any one board member from having undue influence over the other board members.  For example, scoring is done by secret ballot, and any score differences of two or more points between two or more board members were resolved prior to determining selection for promotion.  Finally, upon conclusion of every board, all board members certified they were not subject to, or aware of, any attempt to coerce or influence improperly any action in the formulation of the board’s recommendation.  The DPPB evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFSLMO recommends denial of the relief sought.  AFSLMO states that the CY03B board minority requirement for one African-American board member was met.  The AFSLMO evaluation is at Exhibit D.

AFPC/DPPPO recommends denial.  DPPPO states the applicant has one nonselection to the grade of colonel by the CY03B (27 Oct 03) (chaplain) colonel central selection board.  Their evaluation requires them to rely on the opinions of other Air Force experts; as such, they have reviewed the advisory opinions from DPPB and AFSLMO and based on their findings, they concur with the recommendations to deny the applicant’s request for SSB consideration.  The DPPPO evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant’s counsel on 2 August 2004 for review and response within 30 days (Exhibit F).  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.  Applicant’s contention that the membership for the CY03B Colonel Chaplain Central Selection Board was not properly constituted is noted.  However, we do not find his uncorroborated assertion, in and by itself, sufficiently persuasive so as to override the rationale provided by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility.  Therefore, we agree with the opinions and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their conclusions as our findings in the case.  Accordingly, the applicant’s request for SSB consideration is not favorably considered.  

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.  Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

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 this application in Executive Session on 14 October 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket No. BC-2004-01421:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 28 Apr 04, with attachments.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPB, dated 24 May 04.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, AFSLMO, dated 2 Jun 04. 
	Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 30 Jun 04. 
	Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 Aug 04.