RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:				DOCKET NUMBERS:  BC-2004-01425
INDEX CODE:  131.01
	XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX				COUNSEL: NONE

	XXXXXXXXXXX					HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

He be granted one of the following three courses of action listed in order of preference:  

1.  He receive direct promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel with an effective date of rank as if he had been promoted by the CY02B (12 Nov 02) (P0502B) Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board (CSB); or,

2.  He receive direct promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel with an effective date of rank as if he had been promoted by the CY03A (8 Jul 03) (P0503A) Lieutenant Colonel CSB and, thereafter, Special Selection Board (SSB) consideration by the P0502B CSB with the following corrections to his record:

a.  Void his P0502B Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) and replace it with his P0503A PRF.

b.  Ensure his records identify him as a fully qualified 611th Air Support Squadron Commander.

c.  Include his Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) second oak leaf cluster (2OLC), for the period 14 August 2001 to 7 August 2003.  

d.  Instruct the SSB to give special consideration to the final push statement in the Rater’s comments of his OPR, closing 30 April 2002, as if it had a competitive push statement in terms of command, future job recommendation of greater responsibility, and in-residence Professional Military Education (PME) endorsement equal to the strongest record to which it is compared; or,

3.  He receive SSB consideration by the P0503A board with the following waivers to policy, mitigating conditions, and documentation:  

a.  Include his MSM (2OLC) and the electronically signed letter from his rater amplifying his logic for not recommending in-residence Professional Military Education (PME) or a future job on his 2003 OPR.

b.  Instruct the SSB to give special consideration to the final push statement in the Rater’s comments of his OPR, closing 30 April 2002, as if it had a competitive push statement in terms of command, future job recommendation of greater responsibility, and in-residence Professional Military Education (PME) endorsement equal to the strongest record to which it is compared.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was unjustifiably relieved of command by his commander on 10 June 2002 and deserves to be reconsidered for promotion to lieutenant colonel.  When considered, the Board should resolve any doubt in his favor.

In support of his application, he provides a personal statement; and copies of his P0502B and P0503A PRFs; MSM (2OLC) citation; OPR closing 30 April 2002; Pacific Air Force letter, dated 1 December 2003, documentation surrounding Base Operations Services (BOS) Contracts; 611th Air Support Group History; electronic correspondence concerning his PRFs, PACAF/CV letter dated 30 May 2003 concerning results of investigation; and training certificates.  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 26 March 1986 and a projected date of separation of 31 March 2006.  His current grade is major with an effective date and a date of rank of 1 November 1997.  

On 6 January 2003, the Pacific Air Forces Vice Commander (PACAF/CV) initiated a Commander Directed Investigation (CDI) to determine the fairness and appropriateness of the applicant’s 10 June 2002 release from command.  The Report of Investigation (ROI) dated 26 February 2003 concluded the applicant’s release from command to be fair and appropriate.  On 14 April 2003, the PACAF Staff Judge Advocate found the CDI to be legally sufficient.  On 30 May 2003, following his review of the ROI and legal review, PACAF/CV approved the finding that the applicant’s release from command was both fair and appropriate. 

The applicant has three non-selections to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the CY01B (5 Nov 01)(P0501B), the CY02B (12 Nov 02) (P0502B), and the CY03A (8 Jul 03) (P0503A) Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Boards.  The following is a resume of his OPR ratings commencing with the report closing 30 November 1993:

	PERIOD ENDING				OVERALL EVALUATION

	30 Nov 93 (Captain)			Meets Standards (MS)
	 1 Apr 94						  MS
	 1 Apr 95						  MS
	 1 Apr 96						  MS
	23 Oct 96						  MS
	23 Oct 97						  MS
	26 Apr 98 (Major)				  MS
	25 Jun 99					Training Report (TR)
	25 Jun 00						  MS
	30 Apr 01						  MS
	29 Jun 01					Training Report (TR)
	30 Apr 02						  MS
	 8 Apr 03						  MS
	 8 Apr 04						  MS
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPE strongly recommends denial to replace the applicant’s PRF for the P0502B CSB.  DPPPE states that the applicant has by-passed the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB) administrative relief because he does not have the management level review (MLR) president’s concurrence, and therefore the ERAB would not consider the appeal.  It is not appropriate to use a subsequent PRF for a board in which that specific PRF is not rendered.  The respective raters had different assessments at the time for which they rendered the P0502B PRF with a “Do Not Promote” recommendation and the P0503A PRF with a “Definitely Promote” recommendation.  Additionally, the P0503A PRF contains duty information and job performance that cannot pertain to or be applied to the P0502B PRF because the applicant changed duty locations and jobs.

DPPPE states the applicant has not provided any documentation to support that his PRF for the P0502B CSB was submitted in error or that there was an error in the process in which the PRF was crafted.  In fact, the senior rater for the P0502B PRF confirmed his intentions in an October 2003 e-mail stating he intended for the FY02 board to know that he did not find the applicant worthy of promotion to lieutenant colonel that year.  Additionally, the applicant failed to obtain MLR support to change the PRF.

The DPPPE evaluation is at Exhibit C.  

AFPC/DPPPO recommends denial for direct promotion and SSB consideration.  DPPPO states that since DPPPE has recommended denial to substitute the applicant’s P0502B PRF with the P0503A PRF, SSB consideration is not warranted.  DPPPO assumes the applicant is requesting a waiver to include his MSM (2OLC), awarded for the period 14 August 2001 to 7 August 2003, in his Officer Selection Record (OSR) that met the P0502B and P0503A boards in order to mitigate the negative effects of his weak OPR, which covers the period 1 May 2001 to 30 April 2002.  However, Air Force policy does not allow for decorations with close out dates or approval dates after the convening of the board to be filed in a member’s record.  

DPPPO states that regarding the applicant’s request for direct promotion, Congress and DoD have made it clear their intent that when errors are perceived to ultimately affect promotion, they should be addressed and resolved through the use of SSBs.  It is DPPPO’s opinion that the applicant’s record does not warrant direct promotion, nor does it warrant further SSB consideration.

The DPPPO evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant contests the accuracy of the Air Force advisory opinions and trusts the Board to determine if their expert opinions remain relevant to his requests for direct promotion or voiding his P0502B PRF; and, what value to place on their opinions and recommendations.  The applicant’s rebuttal is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

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 probable error or injustice.  After reviewing the evidence of record, we are not persuaded that the applicant has been the victim of an error or injustice.  We note the applicant’s contentions he was unjustifiably relieved of command and he should be reconsidered for promotion to lieutenant colonel.  The available record shows the Major Air Commander appointed an Investigating Officer to investigate the applicant’s complaints in this matter.  In his Commander-Directed Report of Investigation (ROI) provided for our review, this officer determined that the applicant’s relief from command was fair and appropriate.  The ROI underwent an independent legal review and was found legally sufficient.  Upon review, the Major Air Commander approved the findings and recommendations of the ROI.   Other than his assertions, we have seen no evidence by the applicant that would lead us to believe the approved findings of the independent ROI were erroneous or unjust, or based on factors other than a fair and unbiased assessment of the facts of the case.  In view of the above, we have no basis to conclude that recommendation he received on his P0502B PRF or the evaluations on his 30 April 2002 OPR were unfair or improper.  In addition, because of the closeout date of his MSM (2OLC) (7 August 2003), there is no basis to favorably consider his request for consideration of this award by the CY02B and CY03A lieutenant colonel selection boards.  Finally, since there is no indication in the available evidence that the applicant’s record of performance before the subject selection boards were erroneous or unjust in any way, favorable consideration of his requests for direct promotion or SSB considerations is not appropriate.  Accordingly, the applicant’s requests are denied.  

_________________________________________________________________

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 1 February 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket No. BC-2004-01425:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 27 Jan 04, with atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records and Report
                 of Investigation (PACAF ROI), approved on 30 May
                 03 (Withdrawn).
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPE, dated 15 Jun 04.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 15 Sep 04.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Sep 04.
	Exhibit F.  Applicant’s Rebuttal, dated 5 Oct 04.