RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-02368
		INDEX CODE:  131.01, 107.00
	XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  NONE

	XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX	HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.	His records be corrected by replacing the Air Force Form 709, Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) that met the CY98B Major Central Selection Board (CSB), with a corrected PRF.

2.	He be directly promoted to the grade of major with an effective date as if he had been selected and promoted by the CY98B Major Central Selection Board.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

1.  His PRF that met the CY98B Major CSB was influenced by the AF Form 707B, Company Grade Officer Performance Report (OPR), closing out on 17 November 1992, which was removed from his records in May 2001 by the AFBCMR.  

2.  The senior rater on the OPR closing out on 17 November 1992, acknowledged the OPR influenced his overall promotion recommendation.

3.  The OPR closing out on 17 November 1992 directly influenced his official record for nine years.

4.  The only person who could truly judge his potential without bias is the senior rater and the senior rater recommends a definite promote on the revised PRF. 

In support of his request, the applicant submitted a personal statement, Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB) application, dated 6 April 2004, AF Form 948, Application for Correction/Removal of Evaluation Reports, AF Form 709, Promotion Recommendation, AF Form 77, Supplemental Evaluation Sheet, Air Force Review Boards Agency Directive AFBCMR 01-00212, a letter from the Senior Rater, and Department of the Air Force, Pacific Air Forces letter, dated 10 September 2003.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving on extended active duty in the grade of captain.  Applicant was considered and not selected for promotion to the grade of major by the CY 96A, CY97C,CY98B, CY99A, CY00A, CY00B, CY01A, CY02A, CY02B, CY03A, CY03B and the CY04B Central Selection Boards.

On 13 April 2001, the AFBCMR directed that the OPR closing out on 17 November 1992, be declared void and removed from his records.  The Board further directed, the applicant be considered for promotion to the grade of major by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for which the OPR was a matter of record.  He was then considered and nonselected for promotion by an SSB on 20 August 2001 for theCY96A (P0496), CY97C (P04097C), P0498B, P0499A, P0400, and P0400B Major CSBs.

On 26 February 2004 the applicant submitted an application to the ERAB to correct the P0498B PRF.  On 6 April 2004, the ERAB returned the application without action informing him that the requested change required the support of both the senior rater and the management level review (MLR) president.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPE recommends denial.  In regards to the applicant’s request for direct promotion, both Congress and DoD have made clear their intent that when errors are perceived to ultimately affect promotion, they should be addressed and resolved through the use SSBs.  When many good officers are competing for a limited number of promotions, it is extremely competitive.  Without access to all the competing records and an appreciation of their content, DPPPE believes the practice of sending cases to SSBs is the fairest and best practice.  In the past, and hopefully in the future, the AFBCMR will consider direct promotion only in the most extraordinary circumstances where SSB consideration has been deemed to be totally unworkable.  The applicant’s record does not warrant direct promotion, nor does it warrant SSB consideration.

DPPPE concludes by stating they recommend the AFBCMR deny the applicant’s request to upgrade the overall recommendation to “Definitely Promote” on his P0498B PRF and direct promotion to the grade of major.  However, if the AFBCMR decides to grant relief by substituting the PRF, then DPPPE recommends the applicant’s record be considered by an SSB, as opposed to direct promotion.

The DPPPE complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant states that the sixth sentence of the advisory did not mention information as to the competitive process that substantiated his new promotion recommendation.  He argues that it would be unethical for the senior rater to share specific information regarding the competitive process.  He could find no reference stating the original form must be used.

This PRF is not submitted strictly due to error.  The AFBCMR removed an OPR from his record due to an injustice/error.  He believes an SSB is not the best route for determining his selection for promotion under the circumstances.  It would be hard for any board member to miss the voided OPR, which in turn leads to closer scrutiny by the promotion board members.  He lost out on many leadership, career advancement, and job opportunities over a nine-year period as a result of the bad OPR.  If he were selected for a couple of the high visibility assignments, jobs, or schools, he would be more competitive for promotion.  It is impossible to determine how many times the bad OPR affected his career.  

In regards to the last paragraph of the advisory, he states that although a “DP” would send a strong signal to the SSB, there is a chance he could be non-selected due to closer scrutiny of his record and the lack of facts and circumstances.

He never contemplated encountering discrimination, prejudice and injustice during his career, but found out early in his career that these things do exist in the Air Force.  He could have turned his head when his rater unfairly treated his subordinate, but instead executed moral courage and confronted what he perceived to be wrong.  This led to the bad OPR.  He now asks the Board to right this wrong by approving the corrected PRF and to provide direct promotion to major and favorable consideration for further promotion advancement.

His complete response is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.	The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.	The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the documentation provided, we are not persuaded that the applicant has been the victim of an error or injustice.  We are not persuaded by the evidence presented, that the applicant was denied the opportunity to compete successfully for promotion on a fair and equitable basis.  Changing the overall PRF recommendation to a DP rating must be fully justified and requires concurrence of both the senior rater and the MLR President.  We note, that after the MLR President reviewed the applicant’s record and his request for PRF reaccomplishment, he decided the applicant’s record was not strong enough to earn an overall DP recommendation on his PRF.  In regards to the applicant’s request that he receive direct promotion to the grade of major, we believe that direct promotion should only be considered in extraordinary circumstances where SSB consideration has been deemed to be totally unworkable.  We find no such showing here.  Therefore, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  In the absence of 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 probable 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 Docket Number BC-2004-02368 in Executive Session on 8 February 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 28 Jun 04, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPPPE, dated, 4 Nov 04.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Nov 04.
	Exhibit E.	Letter, Applicant, dated 4 Dec 04.