RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-02441
            INDEX CODE:  131.01
      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  NONE

      XXXXXXX    HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 6 FEBRUARY 2007

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The AF Form 709, Promotion  Recommendation  Form  (PRF),  prepared  for  the
Calendar Year 2002B (CY02B) Colonel  Central  Selection  Board  be  replaced
with a corrected PRF.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His rater, Chaplain, MG P__, wrote his original PRF and  admitted  in  March
2003 that it had been weakly  crafted  and  crucial  material  omitted.  She
wrote a second PRF, after he applied to the Special  Selection  Board  (SSB)
appealing his non-selection to colonel.  However, the rater’s second PRF  to
the SSB was unacceptable. The rater’s actions as  they  relate  to  his  two
PRFs have been deemed questionable.  SAF/IGS  (Pentagon)  has  initiated  an
official investigation of the rater’s actions.

In support of his request applicant provided a copy of his original PRF  and
corrected PRF, a letter of support from  his  senior  rater,  AF  Form  948,
Application for Correction/Removal of Evaluation Reports and a  letter  from
the Supplemental Management Level Review (MLR) President, and AFPC/DPPPE.

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
lieutenant colonel.

He was considered and not selected for promotion to the grade of colonel  by
the Calendar  Years  CY02B,  CY03B,  and  CY04C  Central  Colonel  Selection
Boards.

On 27 May 2003, the applicant submitted an appeal regarding the PRF  to  the
Evaluation Report Appeals Board (ERAB). The ERAB  directed  the  application
be returned  without  action  in  according  with  AFI  36-2401,  Correcting
Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Reports. Paragraph  A1.6.2.2.  and  Table  3
requires both senior rater and management level president  support  for  the
case to be considered by the ERAB. Since the applicant’s  original  PRF  was
considered by the AF Non-Line MLR for CY02B, his revised  PRF  was  reviewed
by an AF Supplemental Management Level Review on 19  August  2003;  however,
the MLR President did not concur that there was a “material  error”  in  the
original PRF and, as such, elected  to  retain  the  original.  Because  the
revised PRF was not accepted, the ERAB is prohibited  from  considering  the
case.

On 24 March 2005, the applicant filed a  Military  Equal  Opportunity  (MEO)
complaint. The applicant alleges that on or between 5 July  and  29  October
2002, Chaplain Maj Gen P__ discriminated  against  the  applicant  based  on
race  by  not  including  information   in   the   applicant’s   Performance
Recommendation Form (PRF) that accurately portrayed his promotion  potential
and by not giving him a “Definitely Promote” in the  applicant’s  PRF.  That
on or about 20 May 2003, Chaplain Maj  Gen  P__  discriminated  against  the
applicant based  on  race  by  making  the  comments  in  a  letter  to  the
supplemental Management Level Review Board  that  the  applicant  was,  “the
very best” African American  chaplain  currently  on  active  duty  and  the
Chaplain Service will suffer if he is non-select to Colonel.”  A  review  of
the three allegations above and the previous  allegations  against  Maj  Gen
P__  do  not  show  that  she  has  unlawfully  discriminated  against   the
applicant.  The  totality  of  the   surrounding   circumstances   and   the
preponderance of evidence is that Maj Gen P__ wrote a strong PRF,  chose  to
compete  the  applicant  for  a  definitely  promote  and  assisted  him  in
appealing the MLR’s decision not to  give  him  a  definitely  promote.  The
totality of the surrounding  circumstances  and  the  preponderance  of  the
evidence is that Maj Gen  P__’s  actions  were  not  the  result  of  racial
discrimination, but a result of her  attempts  to  get  applicant  promoted.
(See Exhibit C)

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPP recommended denial and states the applicant failed to provide  new
supporting evidence to support his case. A letter of support  from  the  MLR
president is still not provided. The senior rater states that  after  review
of the applicant’s PRF, she felt compelled to resubmit  “a  more  definitive
package.” The senior rater does not mention a material error occurred  while
processing the report. In addition, all information included in the  revised
PRF was available to the senior rater when  she  accomplished  the  original
PRF. The changes on the revised PRF did not remove any negative  information
from the  officer’s  record  or  add  positive  information  which  was  not
previously known. The PRF was revised to enhance promotion opportunities.

AFPC/DPPP’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit D.





ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPP amended its previous  Air  Force  evaluation  to  state  the  ERAB
failed to consider the  case  after  the  AF  Non-Line  MLR  President  non-
concurred with the revised PRF. The ERAB submitted the revised  PRF  to  the
AF Non-Line MLR to be considered or a DP promotion recommendation  based  on
the request from the senior rater by an email between her and the  Chief  of
Evaluation Programs Branch. The AF Non Line Supplemental MLR determined  the
revised PRF did not warrant a change in the  promotion  recommendation.  The
applicant had also requested changes to the comments in section  IV  of  the
PRF and grant supplemental promotion consideration for the P0602B. The  ERAB
failed to review this information and advised the applicant to apply to  the
AFBCMR for reconsideration.

The applicant provided support from the Senior Rater  (SR)/Management  Level
(ML) President. Maj Gen P__ is a sole senior rater and considered  the  head
of her own ML for all Air Force chaplains. The SR states that  after  review
of the applicant’s PRF, she felt compelled to resubmit  “a  more  definitive
package.”  The  SR  does  not  mention  a  material  error  occurred   while
processing the report. In addition, all information included in the  revised
PRF was available to the senior rater when  she  accomplished  the  original
PRF. The changes on the revised PFR did not remove any negative  information
from the  officer’s  record  or  add  positive  information  which  was  not
previously known. The PRF was revised to enhance promotion opportunities.

The additional AFPC/DPPP’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  the  applicant
on 30 September 2005, for review and comment within 30  days.   However,  as
of this date, no response has been received by this office.

A complete copy of the revised Air Force evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant on 1 February  2005,  for  review  and  comment  within  30  days.
However, as of this date, no response has been received by this office

_________________________________________________________________

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 an error or injustice  warranting  favorable  consideration  of
the applicant’s request. The supporting documents provided by the  applicant
are sufficient to cause doubt concerning the fairness and  accuracy  of  the
contested Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF).   In  this  respect,  we  are
persuaded by the support provided from  the  Senior  Rater/Management  Level
Review (MLR) President  which  specifically  outline  the  reasons  why  the
contested PRF  is  inaccurate  and  support  the  applicant’s  request.   In
particular, the Board noted the senior rater’s comments  “I  felt  compelled
to resubmit a more definitive package, he is better  than  his  records,  #2
select in his year group, and  his  work  and  leadership  at  the  Chaplain
Service Institute was inadvertently excluded from his original PRF.”  Having
no reason to question the integrity  of  the  evaluators,  we  conclude  the
applicant’s records should be corrected to substitute the  revised  PRF  and
to afford him SSB consideration for the CY02B Colonel  Selection  Board.  In
view of the above findings, we recommend that his records  be  corrected  to
the extent indicated below.

_________________________________________________________________

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  (CY00A)  Central
Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board be declared void  and  removed  from  his
records and the attached PRF be accepted for file in its place.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  Docket  Number     BC-2005-
02441 in Executive Session on 17 February 2006, under the provisions of  AFI
36-2603:

      Mr. John B. Hennessey, Panel Chair
      Mr. Joseph D. Yount, Member
      Ms. Charles E. Bennett, Member

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

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 27 Nov 01, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  IG Report (withdrawn), dated 27 Jul 05.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPP, dated 19 Sep 05.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/DPPP, dated 25 Jan 06.
     Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Sep 06.
     Exhibit G.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Feb 06.




                             JOHN B. HENNESSEY
                                             Panel Chair


AFBCMR BC-2005-02441




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 XXXXXXX, XXXXXXX, be corrected to show that the Promotion
Recommendation Form (PRF), AF Form 709, prepared for the Calendar Year
2002B (CY02B) Central Colonel Selection Board be, and hereby is, declared
void and removed from his records and the attached PRF be accepted for file
in its place.









  JOE G. LINEBERGER

  Director

  Air Force Review Boards Agency

Attachment:
PRF