RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-01538
		INDEX CODE:  131.01

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

She meet a Special Selection Board (SSB) for the Calendar Year 2007 B (CY07B) Colonel and Lieutenant Colonel Medical Service Corps (MSC) Central Selection Board (CSB), P0607B, with a new Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) signed by an impartial senior rater who is not a member of the Air Force Medical Service (AFMS).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was not afforded an impartial, “records-only” assessment at either the AFMS Management Level Review (MLR) or the P0607B Colonel CSB which convened 27 Nov 07.  Senior AFMS officers were “tainted” by an abuse of authority and/or reprisal action taken against her by the Medical Wing commander.

In support of her appeal, the applicant provides a personal statement and eight tabs that include over 40 attachments.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant was commissioned in the Regular Air Force on 7 Mar 85 and has been progressively promoted to the grade of colonel, effective and with a date of rank (DOR) of 1 Aug 09.  She is currently serving in the Regular Air Force and has over 20 years Total Active Federal Commissioned Service (TAFCS).  

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIDEP recommends denial.  DPSIDEP states they are not convinced her senior rater was tainted by the alleged rumors.  In fact, the senior rater’s push line was “Definitely Promote now.” Further, although not required, the senior rater and her management forwarded her records to the Air Force Non-Line MLR to further compete for a “Definitely Promote” consideration – usually reserved for their most competitive candidates.  Additionally, by meeting the Air Force Non-Line MLR, she was afforded an impartial look by a panel of five senior Air Force officers.  DPSIDEP notes she provided an unsigned reaccomplished PRF requesting it be signed by an impartial rater.  Unfortunately, the PRF can only be written and signed by the senior rater.  Finally, DPSIDEP notes she provided an Air Force Form 948, Application for Correction/Removal of Evaluation Reports, but did not submit it to the Evaluation Reports Appeals Board (ERAB).  Nevertheless, the ERAB considered her request and were also not convinced her senior rater had been tainted by the alleged incidents and recommended denial.

DPSIDEP’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit B.

AFPC/PB recommends denial.  PB states the applicant offers no definitive proof the CY07B Colonel Medical Service Corps (MSC) Central Selection Board (CSB) was unfair or prejudicial to her, either its execution or by its board membership.  Therefore, PB states it is appropriate and correct to assume the board proceeded fairly and equitably.

PB’s complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPSOO states their evaluation of her request for an SSB relies heavily on the findings of DPSIDEP and PB.  As those two offices have recommended denial of her request, DPSOO must also recommend denial. 

DPSOO’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit D.

AFPC/JA recommends denial.  JA states the applicant has failed to prove that any member of her promotion selection board, the MLR or her rating chain acted improperly or was prevented from performing his or her duties in accordance with governing laws and directives.

JA’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit E. 

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

Applicant states she was notified in late February (2009) she had been promoted to colonel (06) with only a “Promote” recommendation on her PRF.  It is her contention this action actually strengthens her case to support her request for an SSB.  The year she was in the zone to 06 was filled with so much false, negative information being said about her that she believes she had no chance for promotion.  However, it would appear if her record was strong enough to get promoted above the zone (ABZ) with only a “Promote” her record was certainly strong enough to send to an Aggregate Board to compete with a “Definitely Promote.”

Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit G.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices 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.  With regard to her contention the promotion board was tainted by an abuse of authority and/or a reprisal action taken against her by her commander, we found no evidence to support her assertion.  Nor has she presented any evidence indicating that she followed up on her assertion and filed an official complaint.  In our view, after a thorough review of all the available evidence, she has failed to sustain her burden of having suffered either an error or injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no 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-2008-01538 in Executive Session on 26 August 2010, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence with regard to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2008-01538 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Apr 08, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIDEP, dated 22 Aug 08.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/PB, dated 26 Aug 08, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOO, dated 27 Aug 08.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/JA, dated 4 Sep 08.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Sep 08.
    Exhibit G.  Email, Applicant, dated 15 Apr 09.