RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBERS:  BC-2006-02488
                                       INDEX CODE:  100.05, 131.01
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX                  COUNSEL: NONE

                                             HEARING DESIRED:  NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  20 February 2008


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be considered by Special Selection Board (SSB) by  the  Calendar
Year 2003B (CY03B) (8 Dec 03) (P0403B) Major Central Selection  Board  (CSB)
with a substituted Officer Performance Report (OPR), for the period  2  June
2002 through 1 June 2003, and P0403B Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF).
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His OPR closing 1 June 2003 is invalid because it is missing a  Professional
Military Education (PME) recommendation.  The  decision  to  exclude  a  PME
recommendation reflects  poorly  on  his  potential,  caused  an  inaccurate
assessment of his performance for that period, and placed his records at  an
unfair disadvantage for promotion.  His rater, additional rater, and  senior
rater support this requested records correction

In  support  of  his  application,  the  applicant  provides  copies  of  an
Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB)  Decision;  the  contested  OPR;  the
proposed substitute OPR; statements from his  rater,  additional  rater  and
senior  rater;  contested  PRF;  proposed  substitute  PRF,   correspondence
discussing the missing PME statement; Board decisions on similar cases;  and
selected excerpts from AFI 36-2406.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

According to the military personnel data system, the applicant is  currently
serving on active duty in the grade of captain with a  date  of  rank  of  1
June 1996.  He has a Total Active Federal Military Service  Date  and  Total
Active Federal Commissioned Service (TAFCS) Date  of  8  August  1995.   The
following is a resume of the applicant’s performance ratings:

      PERIOD ENDING                     OVERALL EVALUATION

       7 Aug 97 (Capt)                        MS
       2 May 98                                    MS
      30 Jun 99                         Training Report (TR)
      30 Jun 00                                    MS
      30 Jun 01                                    MS
       1 Jun 02                                    MS
       1 Jun 03                                    MS
       1 Jun 04                                    MS
       1 Jun 05                                    MS
       1 Mar 06                                    MS

The applicant has two nonselections to the grade of major by  the  CY03B  (8
Dec 03) (P0403B) and CY05B (5 Dec 05) (P0405B) Major CSBs.

The applicant filed an appeal to the ERAB under the provisions  of  AFI  36-
2401, Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Reports.  The  ERAB  denied
the applicant’s request on 8 August 2006.

The applicant separated from the Air Force on 31 August 2006.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPEP recommends denying the applicant’s  request  to  substitute  his
OPR closing 1 June 2003 and his P0403B PRF.  Based on  this  recommendation,
ARPC/ DPPPO, finds no basis to grant SSB consideration.  DPPPEP  states  the
applicant  asserts  his  evaluators   decided   not   to   include   a   PME
recommendation in his report based solely on his time-in-grade  (TIG).   TIG
is a factor to determine what level of PME the applicant  is  eligible  for.
His rater states in  his  memorandum  that  a  PME  recommendation  was  not
appropriate for an officer outside  of  his  TIG  eligibility  window.   The
rater then provides the  applicant  a  substitute  report  with  a  Squadron
Officer School  (SOS)  recommendation.   AFI  36-2301,  paragraph  3.3.1.4.,
states “Captains and captain selects:  The officer must  have  more  than  4
years of commissioned service but not more than 7 years TAFCS  at  start  of
SOS class.”  As of the close-out date (1  Jun  03),  the  applicant  was  no
longer eligible for an SOS recommendation  since  he  had  7  years  and  10
months of service.  Including a recommendation for SOS on the OPR  would  be
prohibited in accordance with AFI 36-2406 since the applicant was no  longer
eligible for SOS.  In addition, the applicant did not provide  a  memo  from
the Management Level Review (MLR) President concurring with the change.

DPPPEP states PME recommendations are authorized but not mandatory.   Simply
changing the applicant’s OPR to read a PME  recommendation  for  convenience
is prohibited because it is correcting an alleged wrong due to  nonselection
for  promotion.   While  it  may  be  argued  that   the   omission   of   a
recommendation for PME was inadvertent rather than intentional, the  purpose
of the appeal process is to correct errors or injustices,  not  to  recreate
history or enhance one’s promotion potential.  The time to rewrite a  report
is before it becomes a mater of record,  or  at  least  before  it  meets  a
promotion board.  There is no clear evidence that the omission  of  the  PME
recommendation negatively impacted the applicant’s promotion opportunity.

DPPPEP states in accordance with AFI 36-2406, paragraph 8.1.4.1.7.,  members
are to receive a copy of their PRF approximately 30 days before the  central
promotion board.  After the applicant had reviewed his PRF with  his  senior
rater, he could have corrected or appealed its content prior to  the  board.
In addition, he could have written a letter to the board to further  explain
his accomplishments or to clarify statements reflected on  the  PRF.   There
is no record to indicate the applicant  submitted  an  appeal  or  a  letter
prior to the board.  It is DPPPEP’s opinion that  the  applicant  failed  to
exercise due diligence  to  correct  his  record.   AFI  36-2501,  paragraph
6.3.2.2.,  states  “Do  not  have  an  SSB  if,  by  exercising   reasonable
diligence, the officer should have discovered  the  error  or  omission  and
could have taken corrective action before  the  originally  scheduled  board
convened.”

The DPPPEP evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant has issue  with  several  statements  in  the  DPPPE  advisory
opinion.  While DPPPE states that an SOS recommendation would be  prohibited
based on his TIG, they fail to mention that this requirement can  be  waived
in accordance with AFI 36-2301, paragraph 3.3.2.,  and  that  it  is  common
practice for SOS recommendations to be given to officers who  are  past  the
desired TIG.  Several candidates who were  selected  for  promotion  by  the
same board were outside of the desired TIG window  and  actually  had  those
PME recommendations on their OPRs and PRFs. If  those  recommendations  were
prohibited, they should not have been  allowed  for  anyone.   If  they  are
allowed for  some,  while  prohibited  for  him,  an  imbalance  and  unjust
evaluation  was  created.   AFI   36-2406,   paragraph   3.7.22.1.,   states
“Evaluators  may  make  one  or  more  assignment  recommendations  in  OPRs
provided  those  recommendations  are  both  appropriate  and  realistically
achievable for the officer’s current grade.”  Paragraph 3.7.22.2., cites  an
example:  “For  lieutenant  through  captain,  an  SOS   recommendation   is
appropriate until the officer has completed  SOS  in  residence.”   Clearly,
this AFI allows a PME recommendation for a captain who has not attended  SOS
in residence, regardless of TIG.  If this is in direct conflict with AFI 36-
2301, as noted in the advisory, the common  practice  must  take  precedence
for the interest of his appeal.  Additionally, the  advisory  opinion  fails
to consider the reference  note  to  AFI  36-3201  which  makes  a  PME  TIG
exception for the chaplain, legal, and health career fields.

In reference to the advisory’s comment that he  did  not  provide  a  letter
from the MLR President concurring with the proposed  changes,  AFI  36-2401,
attachment 1, paragraph A1.6.3., titled Changing PRFs  Reviewed  by  a  USAF
Student Evaluation  Board  or  a  USAF  Evaluation  Board  for  Officers  in
Competitive Categories Other than Line of the Air Force  States,  “The  same
requirements listed above apply except  after  meeting  the  senior  rater’s
requirement, forward the appeal to HQ  AFPC/DPPPE  for  processing.”   DPPPE
serves  as  the  management  level  for  these  boards  and  will  secure  a
recommendation from the MLR president.”

He has  submitted  letters,  memos,  and  previous  AFBCMR  decisions  which
provides clear evidence that omission of the PME  recommendation  negatively
impacted his promotion opportunity.  His senior rater provided  a  statement
indicating the missing PME recommendations may have sent the  wrong  message
to the promotion board, as his intent was not to weaken  the  OPR  and  PRF.
In addition, the AFPC records review,  after  non-selection,  indicates  the
missing PME recommendation  was  probably  a  mistake  and  perceived  as  a
negative by the promotion board.  The  previous  AFBCMR  cases  he  included
with his appeal dealt with very similar issues and all  ruled  in  favor  of
the Air Force member.

The reason he did not contest the OPR and PRF prior to the  promotion  board
convening was that he was not aware there was  a  strong,  negative  message
connected with the missing PME recommendations until his records review  had
been conducted following the release of the  board  results.   Additionally,
at the time the OPR and PRF were recorded, his rater was unaware that a  PME
recommendation actually was appropriate and permissible for an  officer  who
had passed the desired TIG window.

The applicant’s rebuttal is 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 an injustice warranting corrective  action  in  regard  to  the
applicant’s request to replace his OPR closing 1 June 2003 and PRF  for  the
CY03B Major CSB; and that his records meet an SSB for the  CY03B  Major  CSB
with the substituted OPR and PRF.  In  regard  to  the  applicant’s  request
that  his  PRF  be  considered  for  upgrading  to  a  “Definitely  Promote”
recommendation, the Board notes that AFPC/DPPPEB  conducted  a  supplemental
management level review (SMLR) on 31 October 2006 using  the  proposed  PRF;
however, the SMLR decision was  to  maintain  the  “Promote”  recommendation
from the original Air Force MLR results.  We do not find a basis to  further
review this issue.  After careful consideration of the applicant’s  complete
submission, including the supporting statements provided by the  members  of
his rating chain, it appears that the lack of a PME  recommendation  in  the
contested reports was the result of incorrect policy interpretation  by  his
evaluators.   In  view  of  the  evaluators’  statements,  we  believe   the
contested  OPR  and  PRF  are  inaccurate  assessments  of  the  applicant’s
performance during the period in question and that they  should  be  removed
from his records and substituted with the reaccomplished  documents.   While
we cannot conclusively determine the absence of PME recommendations  on  the
contested OPR and PRF caused the applicant’s nonselection for  promotion  to
major, we believe any doubt should be resolved  in  the  applicant’s  favor.
Therefore, it is the Board’s opinion 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.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air  Force  relating
to APPLICANT be corrected to show that:

      a.  The Company Grade Officer Performance Report (OPR), AF Form  707B,
rendered for the period 2 June 2002 through 1 June 2003, be, and hereby  is,
declared void and removed from his records and  the  attached  OPR  rendered
for the period 1 June 2002 through 1 June 2003, be filed in his  records  in
its proper sequence.


      b.  The Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF), AF Form 709, prepared for
the Calendar Year 2003B  (CY03B)  Central  Major  Selection  Board  be,  and
hereby is, declared void and removed from his records and the  attached  PRF
be accepted for file in its place.


      It is further directed that his record, to include  the  attached  OPR
closing 1 June 2003 and CY03B PRF, be considered for promotion to the  grade
of major by a Special Selection Board for the CY03B Central Major  Selection
Board, and for any subsequent board for which the OPR closing  1  June  2003
was a matter of record.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in  Executive
Session on 7 February 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
                 Ms. Jan Mulligan, Member
                 Ms. Josephine L. Davis, Member

All members voted to correct the records,  as  recommended.   The  following
documentary evidence for AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2006-02488 was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Aug 06, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/ DPPPEP, dated 18 Dec 06.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Dec 06.
      Exhibit E.  Applicant’s Rebuttal, dated 21 Jan 07.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair


AFBCMR BC-2006-02488




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 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, be corrected to show:

           a.  The Company Grade Officer Performance Report (OPR), AF Form
707B, rendered for the period 2 June 2002 through 1 June 2003, be, and
hereby is, declared void and removed from his records and the attached OPR
rendered for the period 1 June 2002 through 1 June 2003, be filed in his
records in its proper sequence.


           b.  The Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF), AF Form 709,
prepared for the Calendar Year 2003B (CY03B) Central Major Selection Board
be, and hereby is, declared void and removed from his records and the
attached PRF be accepted for file in its place.


      It is further directed that his record, to include the attached OPR
closing 1 June 2003 and CY03B PRF, be considered for promotion to the grade
of major by a Special Selection Board for the CY03B Central Major Selection
Board, and for any subsequent board for which the OPR closing 1 June 2003
was a matter of record.





  JOE G. LINEBERGER

  Director

  Air Force Review Boards Agency

Attachments:
1.  OPR closing 1 June 2003
2.  CY03B PRF