RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: 01-01225
            INDEX CODE 131.01
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.    The 11th Wing Management Level Review (MLR)  process  be  modified  to
allow senior rater involvement.

2.    His record, to include a reaccomplished Promotion Recommendation  Form
(PRF), be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel  by  a
Special Selection Board (SSB) for the Calendar Year  2000A  (CY00A)  Central
Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board, and if selected, he receive  a  date  of
rank (DOR), pay, and benefits retroactive to the CY00A board.

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He  was  denied  fair  consideration  for  a   “Definitely   Promote   (DP)”
recommendation during the 11th Wing MLR process which directly  resulted  in
his promotion nonselection.

The applicant states that  since  the  MLR  process  did  not  allow  direct
participation by his senior rater, his chances of  receiving  a  “Definitely
Promote (DP)” recommendation were significantly  degraded.   He  would  have
received  a  DP  recommendation  had  his  senior  rater  been  allowed   to
participate in the MLR process.  Ordinarily MLRs make provisions for  senior
rater involvement, either by  the  rater  themselves  or  a  duly  appointed
representative.  Due to the highly classified and sensitive  nature  of  his
current duties at the White House, the  direct  involvement  of  his  senior
rater was even more paramount to  ensure  fair  consideration.   His  senior
rater attempted to submit a letter to the MLR board president;  however,  he
believes the letter was not seen at the board.  The senior  rater  attempted
to significantly reword the PRF to send a clear positive DP message  to  the
board; however, the 11th Wing insisted that  only  minor  changes  would  be
supported.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a copy of the PRF  prepared  for
the CY00A board, a revised PRF and statements from the senior rater and  his
supervisor.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of major.

The applicant was considered in-the-promotion-zone (IPZ)  and  not  selected
by the CY00A Lt Col Board that convened on 28 November 2000.  The  applicant
received an overall promotion recommendation of “Promote  (P)”  on  the  PRF
prepared for the CY00A board.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

AFPC/DPPPE recommends the application be  denied.   AFPC/DPPPE  states  that
the 11th Wing acts as the Management Level (ML) for  officers  that  do  not
fall within the jurisdiction of an ML.  The MLR members consist of the  Vice
Chief of Staff, or an officer designated by the  Chief  of  Staff  and  four
members with the minimum grade to serve as senior  rater.   The  records  of
performance of the eligible officers are evaluated to  determined  who  will
receive “DP” and “Promote (P)” recommendations.   The  PRF  is  specifically
designed to allow a senior rater to communicate his/her recommendations  and
opinions to both the MLR and the central selection board.  In the  USAF  MLR
process, no  other  communication  from  any  senior  rater  is  authorized.
Although the  applicant  contends  his  senior  rater  was  not  allowed  to
significantly reword his PRF, the 11th  Wing  Chief  of  Personnel  Programs
Branch refutes this assertion, noting that changes were made to the  PRF  as
requested.  While the  MLR  president  and  senior  rater  have  recommended
approval of the PRF change,  there  is  no  material  error  that  has  been
discovered in the writing or processing of the PRF.  The applicant  competed
for a DP recommendation on an even playing field against all other  eligible
officers who competed at the USAF  MLR.   Furthermore,  appeals  to  rewrite
Section IV, Promotion  Recommendation,  simply  to  include  different,  but
previously known or documented accomplishments, will  not  be  approved  and
should not be approved solely  on  the  retrospective  discovery  that  they
could have been worded more strongly.

The AFPC/DPPPE evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPOO recommends the application be denied.  AFPC/DPPPOO  states  that
Air Force policy is that an evaluation report is accurate  as  written  when
it becomes a matter of record.  The senior  rater  and  MLR  president  have
failed to demonstrate a material error  occurred  on  the  PRF,  a  material
error in the record of performance occurred that  impacted  the  content  of
the PRF, or that the process used to prepare the PRF was flawed.

The AFPC/DPPPOO evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

The applicant states that other than officers in formal  school  status  who
do not have senior raters, all  other  officers  are  represented  by  their
senior raters at an MLR.  As such, contrary to the Air Force  assertion,  he
did not compete for a DP recommendation on an even playing field.  There  is
no prohibition against a senior rater communicating with the MLR as  is  the
case in a central selection board.  One of the cornerstones of  the  current
officer promotion system is the direct involvement of the  senior  rater  in
the promotion recommendation process.   Changes  to  Section  IV  (Promotion
Recommendation) of the PRF requires  the  concurrence  of  both  the  senior
rater  and  the  MLR  president.   In  addition,  the  senior   rater   must
demonstrate there was a material  error  in  the  PRF.   Based  on  the  MLR
president’s approval of the changes to the revised PRF, clearly  a  material
error has been demonstrated.

In further support of the appeal, applicant submits an additional  statement
from his supervisor.

The applicant’s complete response, with attachment, 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.  Sufficient relevant evidence  has  been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of probable error or injustice to warrant providing the  applicant
Special Selection Board (SSB) consideration for promotion to  the  grade  of
lieutenant  colonel  for  the   CY00A   board,   with   inclusion   of   the
reaccomplished PRF.  In this respect, we note that subsequent  to  the  11th
Wing Management Level Review (MLR), the senior rater  attempted  to  rewrite
the applicant’s PRF; however, the 11th  Wing  only  allowed  minor  changes.
The applicant contends that he  was  denied  fair  consideration  for  a  DP
during the 11th Wing MLR process; however,  we  find  insufficient  evidence
that he was treated any differently than other officers similarly  situated.
 In addition, we find no evidence that the 11th Wing  MLR  process  was  not
conducted  in  accordance  with  established  procedures.   The  applicant’s
supervisor states that the modifications made to  the  PRF  after  the  11th
Wing MLR were based  on  the  assumption  that  the  revised  PRF  would  be
reconsidered by the MLR President for an unrestricted DP; however,  the  MLR
President  approved  the  revised   PRF   without   changing   the   overall
recommendation of “Promote,” and  forwarded  it  to  the  central  selection
board.   The  senior  rater  has   provided   a   reaccomplished   PRF   for
consideration by an SSB.  In view of this, we  recommend  the  PRF  prepared
for the CY00A board be removed  from  his  records  and  replaced  with  the
reaccomplished PRF.  Furthermore,  we  recommend  his  corrected  record  be
considered for promotion by an SSB for the CY00A board.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air  Force  relating
to APPLICANT be corrected to show that  the  Promotion  Recommendation  Form
(PRF), AF Form 709, prepared for the Calendar Year 2000A Central  Lieutenant
Colonel Selection Board, be declared void and removed from his  records  and
the reaccomplished PRF be accepted for file in its place.

It is further recommended that he be considered for promotion to  the  grade
of lieutenant colonel by a Special Selection Board  for  the  Calendar  Year
2000A Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection  Board,  with  inclusion  of  the
reaccomplished PRF.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in  Executive
Session on 16 October 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                  Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
                  Ms. Olga M. Crerar, Member
                  Mr. Richard M. McCormick, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Apr 01, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPE, dated 3 Aug 01, w/atch.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPOO, dated 20 Aug 01.
      Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 31 Aug 01.
      Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 21 Sep 01, w/atch.




                                   RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                   Panel Chair

AFBCMR 01-01225




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 the Promotion
Recommendation Form (PRF), AF Form 709, prepared for the Calendar Year
2000A Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board, be, and hereby is,
declared void and removed from his records and the reaccomplished PRF be
accepted for file in its place.

      It is further directed that he be considered for promotion to the
grade of lieutenant colonel by a Special Selection Board for the Calendar
Year 2000A Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board, with inclusion of
the reaccomplished PRF.








JOE G. LINEBERGER

Director

Air Force Review Boards Agency

Attachment:
Reaccomplished PRF