RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  98-00165
                 INDEX CODE:  131

                 COUNSEL:  NONE

                 HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  The Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) reviewed by  the  Calendar
Year 1996C (CY96C) Central  Lieutenant  Colonel  Selection  Board,  be
declared void and replaced with a reaccomplished PRF.

2.  He be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant  colonel
by special selection board (SSB)  for  the  CY96C  Central  Lieutenant
Colonel Selection Board to include the reaccomplished PRF.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The PRF reviewed by the CY96C promotion board seriously misstates  his
duties, responsibilities and accomplishments over the  course  of  his
career.  It does not show the leadership ability he  has  demonstrated
or call to attention major  accomplishments  he  has  achieved.   Most
important, the PRF does not include anything on his current duties  or
accomplishments.   Consideration  of  the  erroneous  PRF  was  unjust
because he attempted to have it corrected prior to its submission and,
contrary to regulations, that request was refused.

In support of his request, applicant  submits  a  statement  from  the
Senior Rater, who has rewritten the contested  PRF  and,  a  statement
from the  Management  Level  Review  Board  President  supporting  the
substitution of the contested PRF with a reaccomplished PRF.

Applicant’s submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant  was  released  from  active  duty  on  30 April  1998   and
subsequently honorably retired effective 1 May 1998 in  the  grade  of
major.   He  served  17  years,  6  months  and  26  days  of   active
commissioned service.

Applicant was considered but not selected for promotion to  the  grade
of lieutenant colonel by the CY96C (8 Jul 96)  and  CY97  (21 Jul  97)
Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Boards.

Applicant had two similar requests submitted under AFI  36-2401.   The
applicant’s first request was denied by the Evaluation  Report  Appeal
Board (ERAB)  on  12  March  1997.   The  ERAB  declined  to  formally
reconsider the second appeal, on 21 July 1997, as the applicant failed
to provide any new material evidence previously not considered by  the
Board.

Applicant’s Officer Performance Report (OPR) profile, since  promotion
to the grade of major, is as follows:

          PERIOD ENDING          OVERALL EVALUATION

            30 Apr 93            Meets Standards (Annual Report)
            15 Sep 93            Meets Standards (Change Rating
                                                   Official)
            15 Sep 94            Meets Standards
            15 Sep 95            Meets Standards
         #   8 Apr 96            Meets Standards
         ##  8 Apr 97            Meets Standards

#  Top report at time of nonselection to the grade of lieutenant
   colonel by the CY96C Central Lieutenant Colonel Board
## Top report at time of nonselection to the grade of lieutenant
   colonel by the CY97 Central Lieutenant Colonel Board

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Recorder, USAF Officer Evaluation Boards, HQ  AFPC/DPPPEB,  states
that in accordance with AFR 36-10, a senior rater is  responsible  for
the information which is placed in a PRF.  A senior rater “reviews the
ratee’s record of performance before preparing the PRF.  Senior Raters
may consider other information about performance  and  conduct..”   In
order for the information to be allowable in a PRF, it must come  from
a reliable source, such as a performance report or from the  officer’s
chain of command.  The Senior Rater at the time the PRF  was  written,
had access to  the  applicant’s  record  of  performance  and  made  a
conscious decision to include the statements that are listed.

A PRF is considered to be  an  accurate  assessment  of  an  officer’s
performance when rendered.  In the applicant’s case, it is clear  that
the PRF does not contain accurate  statements  as  documented  in  his
record of performance and this  may  have  altered  a  board  member’s
perspective  regarding  the  officer’s   career.    As   required   by
regulation, both the senior rater and the management  level  president
concur with the applicant’s request to have the old PRF voided.  Since
the  applicant  is  not  requesting  an  upgrade  to   the   promotion
recommendation in Section IX, recommend approval of the new PRF on the
grounds that the original is not accurate.   However,  recommend  that
lines 4, 5, and 7 be re-written as major bullets and that line 8 be re-
written since it contains inaccurate  information.   All  other  lines
should remain as is since they are valid statements.  Replacing  valid
statements with other valid statements  is  no  reason  to  afford  an
officer an opportunity not available to every other officer.

A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

The  Chief,  Appeals  and  SSB  Branch,  HQ  AFPC/DPPPA,  states  that
evaluation  reports  are  considered  accurate   as   written   unless
substantial evidence to the contrary is provided.   They,  AFPC/DPPPA,
agree  with  the  advisory  opinion  written  by  AAFPC/DPPPEB.    The
applicant has substantiated error on parts of the CY96C PRF.  However,
they note a spelling error in line 5, Section IV of the reaccomplished
PRF.  The word “achievable” is misspelled.   All  other  lines  should
remain unchanged as they are valid statements.  Even if  the  PRF  did
not cover the applicant’s most recent accomplishments,  the  selection
board had his entire officer selection record  that  clearly  outlines
his accomplishments since the date he came on active duty.   They  are
not convinced the contested PRF was the sole cause of the  applicant’s
nonselection.   Based  on  the  evidence   provided,   both   advisory
recommendations are appropriate.

A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant  states,  in   summary,   that   he   disagrees   with   the
recommendation to only correct specific lines of  the  PRF.   When  he
prepared his original appeal, he presented this option to  his  Senior
Rater and the President of the Management Level  Review  Board.   Both
individuals agreed that this was not appropriate in his  (applicant’s)
case.

A copy of the applicant’s response is attached 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.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence  of  probable  error  or  injustice   warranting   favorable
consideration to replace the contested Promotion  Recommendation  Form
(PRF) with a reaccomplished PRF.   After  reviewing  the  evidence  of
record we believe there is some doubt as to whether the contested  PRF
contained an accurate assessment of applicant’s  promotion  potential.
The Senior Rater stated that there were inaccuracies  on  the  PRF  in
question and applicant’s attempt to have  the  inaccuracies  corrected
was not brought to his (Senior Rater) attention before  the  promotion
board convened.  Also, the Management  Level  Review  Board  President
concurs with the Senior Rater and believes the PRF in question did not
accurately represent the demonstrated leadership of the applicant.  In
view of these strong supporting statements, and their  willingness  to
reaccomplish the contested PRF, we recommend the  PRF  for  the  CY96C
lieutenant colonel promotion board be declared void and replaced  with
the  reaccomplished  PRF.   Furthermore,   we   recommend   that   the
applicant’s record, to include the reaccomplished PRF,  be  considered
for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by special  selection
board (SSB) for the CY96C Central Lieutenant Colonel Board.

_______________________________________________________________________
_____________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the  Department  of  the  Air  Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that:

    a.  The Promotion Recommendation, AF Form  709,  reviewed  by  the
CY96C Central Lieutenant Colonel Board, be declared void  and  removed
from his records.

    b.  The attached Promotion Recommendation, AF Form 709, for  cycle
0596C,  reflecting  the   last   sentence,   Section   IV.   Promotion
Recommendation:  “Exceptional far sighted leader, definitely  promote,
send to Senior  Service  School  in-residence,”  be  inserted  in  his
Officer Selection Folder.

It is further recommended that  his  records,  to  include  the  above
referenced PRF, be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant
colonel by Special Selection Board (SSB) for the Calendar  Year  1996C
Central Lieutenant Colonel Board.

_______________________________________________________________________
_____________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 8 October 1998, under the provisions of  AFI  36-
2603:

                  Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
                  Mr. Joseph G. Diamond, Member
              Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Member

All members  voted  to  correct  the  records,  as  recommended.   The
following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Jan 98, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Officer Selection Record.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPEB, dated 30 Jan 98.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPA, dated 5 Feb 98.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 18 Feb 98.
   Exhibit F.  Applicant’s Letter, dated 4 Mar 98.




                                   CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
                                   Panel Chair


INDEX CODE:  131

AFBCMR 98-00165




MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

      Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air
Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority
of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is
directed that:

      The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that:

            a.  The Promotion Recommendation, AF Form 709, reviewed by
the CY96C Central Lieutenant Colonel Board, be, and hereby is,
declared void and removed from his records.

            b.  The attached Promotion Recommendation, AF Form 709,
for cycle 0596C, reflecting the last sentence, Section IV. Promotion
Recommendation:  “Exceptional far sighted leader, definitely promote,
send to Senior Service School in-residence,” be inserted in his
Officer Selection Folder.

      It is further directed that his records, to include the above
referended PRF, be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant
colonel by Special Selection Board (SSB) for the Calendar Year 1996C
Central Lieutenant Colonel Board.







   JOE G. LINEBERGER

   Director

   Air Force Review Boards Agency

Attachment
PRF