RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-00828
            INDEX CODE:  131.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  21 September 2007

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected  to  include  completion  of  Senior  Service
School (SSS) and supplemental consideration for promotion by the  CY87
Lieutenant Colonel Board.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The statement, “PME at the right  level  at  the  right  time  remains
important to total professional development since it will enhance your
performance as an Air Force officer,”  contradicts  itself.   SSS  was
still available to his year group for this exact  reason  which  would
assist them in the accomplishment of their primary duties and  enhance
their  performance  as  an  Air  Force  officer.   Therefore,  it  was
Professional Military Education (PME) at the right level at the  right
time, and should have been displayed in the  Officer  Selection  Brief
(OSB).

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a personal statement and a
copy of his Field Grade Officer Performance Report.

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 major.

Applicant was considered and not selected for promotion to  the  grade
of lieutenant colonel by the CY87 Lieutenant  Colonel  Line  Promotion
Board which convened on 30 November 1987.



OPR profile since 1988, follows:

           PERIOD ENDING           EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL

                        *9 Nov 88         Meets Standards
                        30 Apr 89         Meets Standards
                        10 Jun 90         Meets Standards
                        10 Jan 91         Meets Standards
                        23 Aug 91         Meets Standards
                         2 May 92         Meets Standards
                         2 May 93         Meets Standards
                        29 Jul 02         Meets Standards
                        29 Jul 03         Meets Standards
                        29 Jul 04         Meets Standards
                        29 Jul 05         Meets Standards

* Contested report

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPO states, in 1985, the Air Force began reviewing  eligibility
requirements for officer Professional Military  Education  (PME).   At
that time, captains could  complete  Air  Command  and  Staff  College
(ACSC) by correspondence or seminar.  However, they could  not  attend
in residence  until  selected  for  major.   Similarly,  majors  could
complete Air War College (AWC) by correspondence or seminar.  However,
they could not attend in  residence  until  selection  for  lieutenant
colonel.

In November 1985, the Air Force  decided  to  change  its  eligibility
requirements for officer PME to  have  residence,  correspondence  and
seminar eligibility requirements match.  Announced in  February  1986,
this changes was to be phased in over a 4-year period.  Officers  were
still allowed to enroll if  they  choose  to,  but  it  would  not  be
displayed for promotion boards until  they  were  eligible  to  attend
under new policy guidance.  Although the phased-in plan  seemed  right
at the time it caused problems as officers continued to  enroll  early
believing early PME completion gave them a promotion  advantage.   Air
Force leaders then decided they had to  temper  the  intense  pressure
which officers felt to complete levels of PME earlier in their careers
then the enrollment policy change had prescribed.  Hence, a procedural
change for how PME would be displayed was announced.   Beginning  with
the CY87 Major  and  Lieutenant  Colonel  boards,  ISS  would  not  be
displayed for captains  eligible  for  major  and  SSS  would  not  be
displayed for majors eligible for lieutenant colonel.

The purpose of this change was to  emphasize  the  importance  of  the
right level of PME at the right  time  in  each  officer’s  career  to
increase their  professional  capability  through  a  properly  phased
combination  of  technical/mission   experience   and   training   and
education.  Promotion boards were told that PME at the right level  at
the right time remains an important avenue to increasing qualification
for future jobs, but job  performance  and  leadership  qualities  are
primary factors in accessing officer potential.  Completion of SSS was
therefore, not a requirement  for  promotion  to  lieutenant  colonel.
Therefore, they recommend denial of applicant’s request.  Although the
applicant was eligible  to  enroll  and  complete  SSS,  guidance  was
provided to officers informing  them  that  it  would  not  appear  on
selection briefs until they were eligible  to  attend  under  the  new
policy.  To grant an SSB would be unfair to all other officers who had
completed SSS and were also considered and also did not get promoted.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant states that he was in the last year group of majors  allowed
to enroll in Air War College (AWC) via correspondence or seminar.  All
through his career the Air Force continually emphasized the importance
of continuing education and professional military education  (PME)  to
further enrich his abilities as an officer.  He enrolled in AWC in the
spring of 1987 with that  purpose  in  mind.   Half  way  through  the
seminar program he was informed by his local CBPO that not only  would
completion of AWC be masked  on  his  next  board  but  he  could  not
annotate completion of AWC on his next OPR.  This was 180 degrees  out
from everything the AF had been telling him throughout his career  and
he feels a foul on the Air Force’s part.  He decided to continue  with
the program despite their ruling and completed in 1988.

He states, if he was still allowed  to  enroll  in  AWC,  designed  to
improve  his  professionalism,  abilities,  and  effectiveness  as  an
officer, then he should have been given full  credit  for  taking  the
initiative to do so and should thus have been allowed to  annotate  it
on his OPR and have it displayed at his promotion board.

His request is that his application be approved and that  his  records
meet an SSB displaying his entire record of accomplishments to include
AWC.

Applicant's 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.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the  existence  of  error  or  injustice.   We  took  notice  of   the
applicant's complete submission in judging the  merits  of  the  case;
however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force
and adopt their rationale as the basis for  the  conclusion  that  the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.   Although
the applicant was eligible to enroll and complete  SSS,  guidance  was
provided to officers informing  them  that  it  would  not  appear  on
selection briefs until they were eligible  to  attend  under  the  new
policy.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence  to  the  contrary,  we
find no  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 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2006-00828 in Executive Session on 25 May 2006, under  the  provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

            Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
            Ms. Jan Mulligan, Member
            Mr. James L. Sommer, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 Mar 06, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 10 Apr 06.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Apr 06.
      Exhibit E. Applicant’s Response, dated 28 Apr 06.




                             RICHARD A. PETERSON
                             Panel Chair