2. The applicant requests that his military records be corrected to show that he was approved for a second tour of active duty in the Active Guard and Reserve (AGR) program, and that he be given appropriate back pay and allowances that this correction would entail. 3. He states that he was not given a second tour of active duty because of the prohibition of granting a second tour to an officer who had received a relief for cause officer evaluation report (OER) within 12 months of the termination date of his or her AGR tour. Since he had been given a relief for cause OER, he was denied consideration of a second tour. However, his relief for cause OER was not justified and was fatally flawed by administrative error, factors which resulted in the Officer Special Review Board (OSRB) deleting the offending OER in its entirety. 4. In support of his request he submits a memorandum from his rater during the time covered by the relief for cause OER. His rater attests to the applicant’s positive attributes, states that he had given him a positive OER for the period which mysteriously disappeared, and opines that the applicant became a pawn in a power struggle between the Office of the Chief, Army Reserve (OCAR) and the Army Reserve Personnel Center (ARPERCEN). 5. The applicant’s military records show he was commissioned as a second lieutenant, ARNG, on 25 February 1962 at the age of 26 (his date of birth is 12 October 1935). He entered on active duty in the AGR program on 8 March 1982, then a lieutenant colonel, with 1 year and 11 months of prior active service and 29 years, 2 months and 3 days of prior inactive (USAR/ARNG not on active duty) service. He was promoted to colonel on 14 December 1982. 6. On 3 September 1985 the applicant was notified that he had been selected by an AGR continuation board to remain on active duty in the AGR program beyond his orders termination date. 7. While serving as a colonel as the chairman of a study group assigned to the ARPERCEN, he was given a relief for cause OER for the period covering 26 July through 2 August 1985. That OER was given based on the applicant’s stated ineffectual management, his lack of knowledge and his substandard work which generated useless results. 8. On 6 March 1986 the applicant submitted a request to be reassigned to a colonel AGR position. That request was denied by the OCAR in October 1986. In that denial it was stated that the applicant was not eligible for a subsequent tour in the AGR program based on his relief for cause OER. 9. Accordingly, on 27 November 1986 the applicant was honorably released from active duty at the completion of his active duty commitment and was transferred to the USAR Control Group (Reinforcement). 10. The applicant appealed that OER to the OSRB on 24 October 1990. The OSRB concluded that the applicant had provided clear and convincing evidence that supported his contention that the contested OER was substantively inaccurate and administratively irregular and, therefor, the OSRB directed that the OER be deleted from his records in its entirety. 11. Army Regulation l35-l8 and National Guard Regulation 600-5 govern implementation of the AGR program. Essentially, the program provides for selected USAR and ANG personnel to be voluntarily called to active duty for special projects, programs or mission essential tasks. Periods of active duty may vary from l to 3 (recently, 5) years, with provisions for voluntary extension of the period of active duty beyond the initial call. These regulations state that individuals who have been relieved for cause from any duty assignment may not be considered for an AGR assignment, either initial or subsequent, within 12 months of the report. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant’s request to be retained in the AGR program in a subsequent assignment was denied based solely on his relief for cause OER. 2. Since the relief for cause OER was later found deficient and ordered deleted, the reason for the denial of the applicant’s request to remain on active duty no longer exists. 3. As such, it would be appropriate to grant the relief sought by the applicant, to correct his records to show that he was approved for a subsequent tour of active duty in the AGR program. The period of active duty for second tours was routinely 3 years at the time of the applicant’s release from active duty. 4. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below. RECOMMENDATION: That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by: a. showing that the individual concerned was approved for a 3-year extension of his AGR tour of active duty; b. by voiding his release from active duty on 27 November 1986; c. by showing that he continued to serve on active duty in the AGR program in the rank of colonel from 28 November 1986 to 27 November 1989; and d. by paying to him the back pay and allowances this correction will make due. BOARD VOTE: GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION GRANT FORMAL HEARING DENY APPLICATION CHAIRPERSON