RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-01882
            INDEX CODE:  131.00

            COUNSEL: JOSEPH W. KASTL

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  24 DEC 07

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Officer Performance Report (OPR) rendered for  the  period  20 May  1996
through 2 May  1997,  be  removed  from  his  record  and  replaced  with  a
reaccomplished report and that he  receive  Special  Selection  Board  (SSB)
consideration for promotion to the grade of colonel for the  Calendar  Years
1999A (CY99A), 2000A (CY00A), 2001B (CY01B), 2002B (CY02B),  2003B  (CY03B),
2004A  (CY04A),  2005A  (CY05A),  and  the  2006A  (CY06A)  Colonel  Central
Selection Boards.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

A competitive  Senior  Service  School  (SSS)  recommendation  was  unfairly
deleted, thereby prejudicing consideration for promotion to colonel.

In support of his request, the applicant provided a personal  statement  and
documents extracted from his military personnel records.

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
lieutenant colonel effective and with a date of rank (DOR) 1 December 1994.

The applicant was considered and not selected for promotion to the grade  of
colonel by the CY99A (2  August  1999),  CY00A  (17  July  2000),  CY01B  (3
December 2001), CY02B (3 December 2002), CY03B (27 October 2003),  CY04A  (6
December 2004), CY05A (12 September 2005),  and  the  CY06A  (15  May  2006)
Colonel Central Selection Boards.

OPR profile since 1997 follows:

           PERIOD ENDING            EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL

                  * 2 May 97 Meets Standards (MS)
                 15 Mar 98                   (MS)
                 15 Mar 99                   (MS)
                       5 Jun 00   Training Report (TR)
                       5 Jun 01                    (MS)
                       9 May 02                    (MS)
                       9 May 03                    (MS)
                       9 May 04                    (MS)
                       9 May 05                    (MS)

* Contested Report

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPEP recommends  denial.   DPPPEP  states  the  applicant’s  attorney
states that the original evaluators intended to give  a  highly  competitive
report with words positioning for advance schooling and promotion  but  when
the applicant was selected for Air War College they deleted the  words  from
his report.  He feels the report was downgraded after he had to decline  Air
War College to take care of his late mother.  The applicant’s lawyer  quotes
AFI 36-2406 which is the wrong regulation.  The  correct  regulation  during
the reporting period was AFI 36-2402.  HQ AFMC EPR,  OPR,  and  PRF  writing
guide for personnel within AFMC, is not policy.   The  governing  regulation
bases  comments  on  performance,  not  on  other  considerations,  such  as
Professional Military Education  (PME),  academic  education,  duty  history
etc.  The regulation states  recommendations  to  select  for  a  particular
assignment, PME, augmentation, continuation, or  indefinite  reserve  status
are appropriate.  The regulation  does  not  state  that  PME  comments  are
mandatory on reports however, states it is appropriate  to  document  in  an
evaluation.

The applicant states that his rater who is an Army 0-6 did not know the  Air
Force OPR system.  The Army rater developed  the  OPR  like  the  Army  does
their reports and initially  reasoned  that  since  the  applicant  declined
school, no comment was appropriate.  The applicant did provide letters  from
all the evaluators stating their intention was not to hurt  the  applicant’s
career when  the  report  was  accomplished.   It  is  entirely  within  the
discretion of the rating chain whether or not  to  recommend  the  applicant
for PME.  DPPPEP points out that this discretion expires  after  the  report
is signed by the evaluators and becomes a matter of record.  The request  to
add a PME recommendation to the contested report is  unfounded  and  not  in
accordance  with  Air  Force  policy  regarding  optional   information   on
evaluation reports.

The applicant’s rater states in his letter dated 15 September 2001 that  the
applicant did not attend Air War College in 1997 but  actually  attended  in
residence in 1999.  This is completely outside  the  rating  period  of  the
contested report.  A letter signed by the rater from the ERAB dated 22  July
2002 states the applicant had the  declination  statement  removed  and  his
eligibility reinstated for PME but was not  eligible  during  the  time  the
report was completed because the  reinstatement  wasn’t  approved  until  21
October 1998, 17 months after the report closed out.  The ERAB  also  agreed
it would not be appropriate to substitute  the  report  to  include  actions
taken outside the reporting period.

The DPPPEP complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 18 August 2006, the evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for  review
and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).  As of this date,  this  office  has
received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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 an error or injustice.  The  applicant’s  contentions  and  the
supporting statements from the rating chain of the contested  OPR  are  duly
noted; however, after a thorough review of  the  documentation  provided  in
support of his appeal we find no evidence of an error in this  case  and  we
are not persuaded by his contentions that he  has  been  the  victim  of  an
injustice.  Evidence has not been presented which would lead us  to  believe
that there were any errors or improprieties in his promotion  recommendation
process; or, that he was denied the opportunity to compete successfully  for
promotion on a fair and equitable  basis.   Therefore,  we  agree  with  the
opinion  and  recommendation  of   the   Air   Force   office   of   primary
responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion  that
the applicant has not been the victim of an  error  or  injustice.   In  the
absence of evidence  to  the  contrary,  we  find  no  compelling  basis  to
recommend granting the relief sought.


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 involved.  Therefore, the request  for
a hearing is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate  the
existence of an error or injustice; the application  was  denied  without  a
personal appearance; and 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-
01882 in Executive Session on 21 September 2006,  under  the  provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Joseph D. Yount, Member
                 Mr. Gregory A. Parker, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 16 June 2006, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Master Personnel Record.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPEP, dated 9 August 2006.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 August 2006.




                       MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
                       Panel Chair