RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                        DOCKET  NUMBER:   BC-2006-
00402
                                             INDEX CODE:  131.00

                                             COUNSEL:  NONE

                                             HEARING DESIRED:   YES




MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  7 AUGUST 2007


___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) prepared  on  him  for  the
Calendar Year (CY) 2002B Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board
be substituted with a revised PRF.

He be considered for promotion to the grade of  lieutenant  colonel
by special selection board (SSB) by the  CY02B  Lieutenant  Colonel
Central Selection Board (CSB) with the revised PRF.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His PRF did not adequately represent his assets, strong  leadership
skills, and  current  job  accomplishments.   It  did  not  have  a
promotion push statement or any  stratification  from  his  current
job.   He  believes  for  these  reasons,  he  was  not   seriously
considered for promotion.  He would  like  the  reaccomplished  PRF
with the following changes be submitted for the next SSB:

      a. Inclusion of a corrected and relevant “push” statement (#2
of  5  from   Ops   Group—Definitely   promote   this   exceptional
leader/warrior—a must for Cmd and SSS now!)

       b.   Inclusion  of  current  job  performance   (Outstanding
squadron  equivalent   commander—rescued   broken/demoralized   IWF
resulting  in  SAV  “Excellent”)  and   (Expertly   led   7AF/ROKAF
IW—innovative relocation of IWF into  AOC—best  IW  integration  to
date in UFL)

      c.   Strengthen  the  PRF  to  represent  correct  leadership
potential and accomplishments such as:

            1. Superb leadership  at  every  level—Combat  aviator,
Center lab director, Bomb Sqd ADO, 2x Flt CC, IWF/CC

            2.  Exceptional EWO—25 combat missions—first B-52 CONUS-
to-theater strike—recovered battle-damaged jet

            3.  NAIC Director of  $10M  analysis  lab—led  National
Exercise teams providing real-time support to warfighters

             4.   Skillful  ADO—managed  $37.5M   flying   training
program—developed 5BW CORI plans earning IG “Excellent”

            5.  Linchpin to 2 BW NORI “Outstanding”—developed  B-52
nuclear generation flow—NORI “Superior Performer”

            6.  Strong leadership—flight CC  of  2nd  OSS  OSX  and
CCC—simultaneously elevated both to NORI “Excellent”

In support of his appeal, applicant provided a personal  statement,
letters of support from his  rating  chain,  copies  of  his  PRFs,
documents indicating his attempt to  gain  support  of  his  senior
rater,  and  correspondence   pertaining   to   his   congressional
inquiries.

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

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is presently serving on active duty in the  grade  of
major.  His Total Active Federal Military Service Date (TAFMSD)  is
6 Jun 87.  A review of his last ten OPRs indicates overall  ratings
of “Meets Standards.”  He has four nonselections to  the  grade  of
lieutenant colonel by the CY02B (12 Nov 02) (P0502B), CY03A (8  Jul
03) (P0503A), CY04B (12 Jul 04) (P0504B),  and  CY05A  (6  Jul  05)
(P0505A) Lieutenant Colonel CSBs.  He did not file an appeal  under
the provisions of AFI  36-2401,  Correcting  Officer  and  Enlisted
Evaluation Reports, 20 Feb 04.

__________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPPEP recommends denial  of  the  applicant’s  request  to
change his P0502B PRF.  IAW AFI 36-2406, paragraph 8.1.4.1.7.,  the
senior rater provides the ratee a copy of the PRF approximately  30
days before the CSB.  The reason for this is:   1)  to  advise  the
ratee of the senior rater’s  promotion  recommendation  and  2)  to
provide the ratee an opportunity to point out any errors of fact to
the senior rater so they may be corrected prior to  the  CSB.   The
applicant failed  to  correct  his  PRF  prior  to  his  CSB.   The
applicant was allotted the 30 days prior to the board and failed to
take the initiative to correct any errors.

When submitting an appeal to correct the PRF, a material  error  in
the PRF itself; substantive changes to the  record  of  performance
used to assess your performance-based  potential;  or,  a  material
error in the PRF preparation process, may justify changes to a PRF.
 Normally, comments  and  recommendations  are  required  from  the
senior rater who signed the PRF and  the  Management  Level  Review
(MLR) president who reviewed it.  In this case,  the  applicant  is
unable to gain the support of the senior rater.

When requesting changes to section IV of the PRF, concurrences from
both the senior rater and  MLR  president  are  normally  required.
Section IV of the PRF should “provide key performance factors  from
the officer’s entire career.”  Obviously, the space on the form  is
limited  and  it  is  not  usually  possible  to   describe   every
achievement in an officer’s career.  The  senior  rater  bears  the
responsibility of selecting what to include in the PRF, and what to
leave out; which portions of the officer’s  career  to  concentrate
on, and which portions to have supported by the record.   While  he
or she may request inputs from subordinate commanders, to do so  is
not mandatory.  To change section IV, the senior rater will need to
demonstrate there was a material error in the PRF; a material error
in the record  of  performance  which  substantially  impacted  the
content of the PRF; or a material error in the process by which the
PRF was crafted.  In all instances, the requested change to section
IV must be related to the documented  error.   Appeals  to  rewrite
section IV simply to include different,  but  previously  known  or
documented accomplishments are inappropriate.   The  applicant  has
failed to provide supporting documents of a material error  in  the
report.  The information the applicant  has  requested  the  AFBCMR
place in the PRF was previously known to  the  senior  rater.   The
information does not remove negative information from the officer’s
record or add positive information that was not previously known.

The applicant seems to be under the mistaken  impression  that  the
selection board’s review of an officer’s record stops  at  the  PRF
and that they do not delve any further into the record.  This could
not be further from the truth.  Central board evaluates the  entire
officer record to  assess  whole  person  factors.   These  factors
include job performance, professional qualities, depth and  breadth
of experience, leadership, and academic and  professional  military
education.  While the PRF may not be worded the way  the  applicant
would like to describe his accomplishments, the selection board had
his entire OSR that clearly outlines his accomplishments since  the
day he came on active duty.

Evaluation  reports  are  considered  accurate  as  written  unless
substantial evidence to the contrary is provided.   As  such,  they
receive exhaustive reviews prior to becoming a  matter  of  record.
Any report can be  rewritten  to  be  harder  hitting,  to  provide
embellishments, or enhance the ratee’s  promotion  potential.   But
the time frame to do that is before the report becomes a matter  of
record.  The appeals process does not exist to recreate history  or
enhance chances for promotion.  It appears this is exactly what the
applicant is attempting to do—recreate history.  As such, they  are
not convinced the contested report is not accurate as  written  and
do not support the request for correction.

Based on this recommendation, AFPC/DPPPO finds no  basis  to  grant
SSB consideration.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant provides a statement  in  response  to  the  advisory
opinions.  He did not submit his application because of a  material
error on his PRF.  His contention with the PRF is that it is unjust
representation of  his  career  and  his  record  as  a  commander,
expertly filling a Lieutenant Colonel billet.

The advisory states, “…the applicant was allotted the 30 days prior
to the board and failed to  take  the  initiative  to  correct  any
errors.”  He did not receive his PRF 30 days prior to the CSB.   He
was only able to procure the PRF 25  days  prior  after  vigorously
requesting for it to be faxed to him.  He was TDY attending Command
and Control Warrior Advanced Course from 6 Oct 01 thru 10  Nov  02,
and due to geographical separation and  rigid  class  and  exercise
schedules, he was not allotted time or  appropriate  access  before
the board to adequately represent his case to his senior rater.

He made many attempts to contact his senior rater prior to the CSB.
 When he was finally able to reach him, his senior rater  suggested
that he contact his OG/CCs.  He was told not to worry that the  PRF
was good (at the time his immediate supervisor had no idea the  PRF
had changed from his version) and they would talk about it when  he
returned from his TDY.  By the time he was back to  Korea,  it  was
approximately two days before the CSB and he was working to correct
other errors in his record (BC-2003-01657).

IAW  AFI  36-2406,  paragraph   8.1.4.1.7.,   if   the   ratee   is
geographically separated, send it (PRF) to  the  ratee  by  “return
receipt requested” mail.  He  did  not  receive  his  PRF  when  he
returned to Osan AB.  The only PRF he had before the  CSB  was  the
one he fought to procure.  He was never formally given his PRF  and
thus he was never allotted the  30  days  prior  to  the  board  to
correct the injustice.

He is not under the impression that the selection board’s review of
an officer’s record stops at the PRF.  He does believe that the PRF
is the single most important piece of paper in  your  record.   The
PRF is the doorway to the career of the ratee.  The PRF is supposed
to spark the interest of a review officer.  In the short time  that
a review officer has to evaluate an officer’s career, the PRF  will
be a guide to enabling the officer to get the whole person factors.
 This is where his PRF failed.

In summary, he reiterates the many injustices in his record.

      a.  His PRF failed to accurately reflect the  career  he  was
accomplishing.  It did not provide key performance factors from his
entire career.

      b.  His PRF was written blind  with  none  of  the  requested
inputs from subordinate commanders.  His rater was under the  false
impression that  it  contained  the  inputs  from  his  subordinate
commanders, which it did not.

      c.  His rater refused to incorporate the MSM information that
was missing from the record.

      d.  There are  no  true  checks  and  balances  preventing  a
commander from stopping an officer’s  career.   Though  recommended
for a DP by two OG/CCs, his rater  refused  to  stratify  his  PRF,
incorporate a push statement or put any effort into his  PRF  which
signifies this information.

He is not trying to  recreate  history,  but  rather  correct  past
injustices so that he might have a future.

Applicant’s complete response is attached at Exhibit E.

___________________________________________________________________

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  error  or  injustice  regarding  the  applicant’s
request for consideration  for  promotion  by  SSB  for  the  CY02B
Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board with  a  corrected  PRF.
The applicant believes his PRF did  not  adequately  represent  his
assets, strong leadership skills, and current job  accomplishments,
and additionally lacked a promotion  push  statement.    While  the
applicant was unable to gain the support of his  Senior  Rater,  he
provided many letters of support from others in his  rating  chain,
and even more compelling a letter of support  from  the  Management
Level Review (MLR) President, in which he supports  corrections  to
his PRF and supplemental  promotion  consideration.   We  note  the
applicant has provided an unsigned PRF that he  has  prepared  with
the corrections he believes should be made to his PRF.  However, it
is not clear from the MLR President’s letter he supports the use of
the PRF the applicant has  provided.   To  ensure  that  a  PRF  is
prepared by an appropriate level in the applicant’s  rating  chain,
we recommend the  MLR  President  or  an  appropriate  official  as
determined by AFPC be provided the opportunity  to  prepare  a  PRF
they believe meets the requirements.  Therefore, the Board believes
in order to provide the applicant fair and equitable relief and  to
preclude any possibility of an injustice,  his  records  should  be
corrected as indicated below.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and  it  has  not
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel  will
materially add to  our  understanding  of  the  issue(s)  involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.

___________________________________________________________________



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 2002B (CY02B) Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection  Board  be,
and hereby is, declared void and removed from his records and a new
PRF prepared by either the Management Level Review (MLR)  President
or another official in his rating chain, 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  CY02B  Central  Lieutenant  Colonel  Selection   Board,   with
inclusion of the substituted PRF.

___________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket  Number
BC-2006-00402 in Executive  Session  on  10  May  2006,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Panel Chair
      Mr. Wallace F. Beard Jr., Member
      Ms. Barbara R. Murray, Member

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

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 Feb 06, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPEP, dated 28 Mar 06.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Apr 06.
     Exhibit E.  Memorandum, Applicant, 24 Apr 06.




                                   MICHAEL V. BARBINO
                                   Panel Chair



AFBCMR BC-2006-00402




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 2002B (CY02B) Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection
Board be, and hereby is, declared void and removed from his records
and a new PRF prepared by either the Management Level Review (MLR)
President or another official in his rating chain, 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 CY02B Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board, with
inclusion of the substituted PRF.





            JOE G. LINEBERGER
            Director
            Air Force Review Boards Agency