RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-03699
                                             INDEX CODE:  131.01
      XXXXXX                                 COUNSEL:  NONE

                                             HEARING DESIRED:  YES


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  25 May 2008 2005


________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) that was reviewed by the  CY06A  (13
March 2006) (P0506A) Lieutenant Colonel (Lt  Col)  Central  Selection  Board
(CSB) be replaced with the PRF he has provided with this application.

He be considered by a Special Selection Board (SSB) with  inclusion  of  the
corrected P0506A PRF.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

An error was made on his PRF for the P0506A Lt Col CSB.   His  Senior  Rater
(SR) and Management Level Review (MLR) President  clearly  acknowledged  and
agreed to correct the error.  However, the Evaluation Reports  Appeal  Board
(ERAB) chose to dismiss this conspicuous point.

Though the decision on who receives a Definitely Promote (DP) is  subjective
and solely in the SR’s purview, if  one  reviews  and  follows  his  rater’s
subjective logic via the bullets in  his  last  Officer  Performance  Report
(OPR), one would be hard pressed not to conclude he should have  received  a
DP.

He is confident that anyone willing to thoroughly examine  his  record  will
find  that  it  clearly  shows  him  worthy   of   accepting   the   greater
responsibilities tied to the rank of Lieutenant Colonel.

In support of the appeal,  applicant  submits  copies  of  an  AF  IMT  948,
Application For Correction/Removal of Evaluation Reports,  and  attachments,
dated 28 August 2006,  an  e-mail  containing  the  ERAB  denial,  dated  18
September 2006, an e-mail containing information  on  In  the  Primary  Zone
(IPZ) Majors and Definitely Promote (DP) rankings, dated 3  and  6  November
2006, numerous Power Point slides pertaining  to  AF/XOR  Manning,  and  his
“Promotion Board Record.”

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant was considered, but was not selected for promotion  to  the  grade
of Lt Col, by the CY06A (13 March 06) (P0506A) CSB.  The top OPR  considered
by the CSB closed out on 15 January 2006, and contained the  statement  “One
of my  top  10  of  170  AOs”  in  Section  VII,  Additional  Rater  Overall
Assessment.  The PRF considered by the CSB contained the statement “top  10%
of 170 XOR action officers” in Section IV, Promotion Recommendation, and  an
overall recommendation in Section IX, Overall Recommendation, of  “Promote”.


Applicant filed an appeal with the ERAB in August 2006.   The  reason  given
to support the requested action was that there was an error in fact  on  the
PRF considered by the 13 March 2006 Lt Col CSB.  The ERAB denied the  appeal
on 18 September 2006.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPEP  recommends  denial.   A  material  error  in  the  PRF  itself;
substantive changes  to  the  record  of  performance  used  to  assess  the
performance-based potential; or a material error  in  the  PRF  process  may
justify changes to a PRF.  The  change  must,  in  effect,  remove  negative
information from an officer’s record or add positive information  which  was
not previously known.  A  simple  administrative  change  to  an  evaluation
report rarely meets the criteria to re-accomplish a PRF.

Although applicant has provided an  e-mail  that  implies  the  SR  and  MLR
President concur with correcting the  report,  SR  and  MLR  Presidents  are
required to provide comments and recommendations, not only for support,  but
at  least  for   clarification   or   explanation.    These   comments   are
conspicuously absent, and applicant has not  provided  any  such  documents.
Without benefit of these statements, the only conclusion that can  be  drawn
is that the PRF is accurate as written.

Applicant states the error was not identified in time to  be  corrected  due
to late receipt of the 15 January 2006  Officer  Performance  Report  (OPR),
which was, in January 2006, processed in parallel  with  the  PRF.   He  was
enroute to his new duty station and did  not  receive  the  PRF  until  mid-
February 2006; the OPR  was  not  available  until  much  later.   His  date
arrived station was  16  January  2006,  and  AFPC/DPBR3  has  verified  the
15 January 2006 OPR was available to the applicant on 17 February  2006   As
the CSB began on 13 March 2006, he had ample time to consult with the SR  on
inaccuracies or discrepancies  within  the  report.   It  is  the  officer’s
responsibility  to  review  record  of  performance,   Officer-Pre-Selection
Briefs, and PRFs for accuracy, and, if the  SR  concurs  that  there  is  an
error, there are procedures to correct the PRF prior to the CSB.

A  report  is  not  erroneous  or  unfair  because  a  member  believes   it
contributed to a non-selection for promotion of may impact future  promotion
or career opportunities.  The simple willingness by evaluators  to  upgrade,
rewrite, or void a report is not a valid basis for doing so.

The AFPC/DPPPEP evaluation is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant responded to the AFPC/DPPPEP advisory on 16  February  2007.   The
SR and MLR President made their intentions clear via a corrected and  signed
PRF which was furnished to the ERAB, and thus  did  not  merely  imply  that
they concurred  with  the  requested  correction.   Given  this,  it  seemed
unnecessary to obtain further written statements from them for this  appeal;
however, he provided a written statement  from  the  SR,  dated  7  February
2007,  and  the  MLR  President,  dated  8  February  2007,  supporting  the
corrections to his PRF.

The change being requested does constitute a material error in the  PRF  and
is not merely administrative.  There is  a  significant  difference  between
10% of 170 and 10 of 170 (17 of 170 versus 10 of 170), and seven rank  order
positions is a substantive error, especially when one is being  compared  to
170 individuals with extremely competitive records.

The statement that there was ample time to resolve  the  error  in  the  PRF
assumes he was aware of the error.  He was not aware a  discrepancy  existed
because he did not have his last OPR in hand to compare with the  PRF  prior
to his PCS or commencement  of  the  CSB.   However,  he  did  make  several
attempts to obtain a copy of the OPR  upon  his  arrival  at  his  new  duty
station.

Finally, the advisory did not address any  of  his  concerns  regarding  the
inconsistency of the “top 10 of  170”  PRF/OPR  extract  and  the  promotion
recommendation he received.

Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit D.

________________________________________________________________

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 probable  error  or  injustice  to  warrant  changing  the  PRF
prepared for the CY06A, P0506A, Lieutenant Colonel CSB.  Applicant’s  senior
rater and the MLR President of the CY06A, P0506A,  Lieutenant  Colonel  CSB,
have acknowledged that an error was made in the PRF that was  prepared  for,
and considered by, the CSB.  They have recommended the PRF be replaced  with
the PRF contained  in  this  application  and  that  applicant  receive  SSB
consideration with the corrected PRF.   While  the  Board  cannot  determine
what impact this corrected PRF would have had on the outcome of  the  CY06A,
P0506A, Lieutenant Colonel CSB, the Board is  persuaded  he  may  have  been
deprived of full and fair consideration.  In  view  of  the  above,  and  in
order to resolve any injustice and allow the SSB to perform a  complete  and
accurate assessment, we recommend that  his  records  be  corrected  to  the
extent 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 DETERMINES 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  2006A  (P0506A),
Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board, be  declared  void  and  removed
from his records, and the PRF contained in this application be accepted  for
file in its place.

It is further recommended  that  applicant’s  record,  to  include  the  PRF
contained in this application, be considered for promotion to the  grade  of
lieutenant colonel by a Special Selection Board for the Calendar Year  2006A
(P0506A), Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board.

________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered  Docket  Number  BC-2006-03699
in Executive Session on 14 March 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                       Ms. Patricia J. Zarodkiewicz, Vice Chair
                       Mr. Richard K. Hartley, Member
                       Mr. Garry G. Sauner, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 25 Nov 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPEP, dated 18 Jan 07.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, dated 16 Feb 07, w/atchs.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Jan 07.




                                   PATRICIA J. ZARODKIEWICZ
                                   Vice Chair


AFBCMR 2006-03699




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 XXXXXXXXX, be corrected to show that the Promotion
Recommendation Form (PRF), AF Form 709, prepared for the Calendar Year
2006A (P0506A), Lieutenant Colonel Central 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 PRF,
be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by a Special
Selection Board for the CY06A Lieutenant Colonel Central Selection Board.









  JOE G. LINEBERGER

  Director

  Air Force Review Boards Agency

Attachment:
PRF, P0506A