RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  00-02461
            INDEX NUMBER:  131.00; 111.05

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  The Officer Performance Report (OPR), rendered for  the  period  1 March
1997 through 28 February 1998, be removed from his record  and  that  it  be
replaced with  the  reaccomplished  report  for  the  same  period  that  he
submitted with his application; and,

2.  He be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel  by  a
Special Selection Board (SSB) for the CY99B  (30 November  1999)  Lieutenant
Colonel Selection Board, with inclusion of the reaccomplished OPR.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The original OPR lacked  a  future  job  recommendation  by  the  rater  and
additional  rater.   He  understands  that  a  job  recommendation  is   not
“officially” required; however, the lack of one stopped the continuity  flow
from previous and subsequent reports.  At the time the  report  was  written
and signed, he had already been selected for a tour at the Air Staff.   Both
the rater and additional rater knew this, but unfortunately  overlooked  the
importance of including the post-Air Staff  tour  recommendation.   To  show
continuity, he included OPRs for the periods immediately  after  and  before
the contested report, which  all  provide  future  job  and  service  school
recommendations.

The rater and additional rater provided  supporting  statements  and  stated
that the OPR may have negatively impacted recent  promotion  board  results.
He understands that evaluations and  promotion  opportunities  are  separate
issues, and that the AFI prohibits using nonselection  for  promotion  as  a
reason to appeal a report to the Evaluation  Reports  Appeal  Board  (ERAB).
He agrees with the ERAB that the original report was not in error;  however,
he feels an injustice occurred as  the  OPR  did  not  include  all  of  the
appropriate information.

The appeal is an attempt to  correct  the  performance  report  to  be  more
indicative of  his  future  potential  and  more  in  line  with  his  other
performance reports.  The rater, additional rater and  reviewer  all  concur
and have signed the new OPR.  The new OPR is  a  better  reflection  of  his
performance and potential at the time.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 28 March 1984, the applicant was appointed a second  lieutenant,  Reserve
of the Air Force, and was voluntarily ordered to  extended  active  duty  on
the same date.  He  was  progressively  promoted  to  the  grade  of  major,
effective 1 March 1996.

A resume of the applicant’s last 10 OPRs follows:

      PERIOD ENDING    OVERALL EVALUATION

      13 May 91  Meets Standards (MS)
      13 May 92  MS
      13 May 93  MS
      28 Feb 94  MS
      28 Feb 95  MS
      28 Feb 96  MS
      28 Feb 97  MS
  *   28 Feb 98  MS
  #   28 Feb 99  MS
      28 Feb 00  MS

  * Contested report.

  # Top report in file when considered and not  selected  for  promotion  by
the CY99B Lieutenant Colonel Board, which convened on 30 November 1999.

The ERAB denied the request on 30 June 2000.

The applicant was considered for promotion by the CY00A  Lieutenant  Colonel
Selection Board, which convened on 28 November 2000.   The  results  of  the
board have not been released.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Chief, Appeals and  SSB  Branch,  AFPC/DPPPA,  recommended  denial.   In
reference to the applicant’s contention that the OPR stopped the  continuity
flow from previous and subsequent reports, the OPR was designed  to  provide
a rating for a specific period  of  time  based  on  the  performance  noted
during that period, not based on previous or subsequent performance.   There
is  no  requirement  to  ensure  continuous   flow   in   command   or   job
recommendations from one report to the next.

The  applicant  contends  he  should  receive  SSB  consideration  with  the
inclusion of the corrected report.  DPPPA  does  not  agree.   There  is  no
clear evidence that the omission  of  the  job  recommendation  on  the  OPR
impacted his promotion opportunity.   Central  boards  evaluate  the  entire
officer selection record  (OSR).   Moreover,  a  review  of  a  sampling  of
selection records from the  CY99B  board  revealed  that  not  all  officers
selected  for  promotion  had  job  recommendations  on  their  OPRs.    The
selection board had the applicant’s entire OSR  that  clearly  outlined  his
accomplishments since the date he came on active duty--up to  and  including
his performance at his new assignment at the Pentagon.

Finally, DPPPA pointed out that job recommendations on  OPRs  are  optional,
and the applicant and his evaluators clearly admit this fact.  The  omission
of optional information on a report has no effect on  the  validity  of  the
report.  The AFI is very clear regarding job recommendations,  stating  that
they are appropriate,  but  not  mandatory.   It  was  entirely  within  the
discretion of the rating chain whether or not  to  recommend  the  applicant
for a future assignment.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded  to  the  applicant  on  27
October 2000, for review  and  response  within  30 days  (Exhibit D).   The
applicant reviewed the advisory  opinion  and  stated  that  the  evaluators
clearly did not intend to detract from his future potential  by  omitting  a
job recommendation.  He agrees that  performance  evaluation  and  promotion
are separate issues.  However, in this  case,  they  are  intertwined.   His
nonselection for promotion underscores the negative impact of the  OPR,  but
Air Force policy does  not  allow  for  nonselection  to  be  a  reason  for
changing a performance report.  Here  though,  his  nonselection  led  to  a
significant discovery of information that should have been included  in  the
OPR.  The applicant’s complete response, with attachment, 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 probable error or injustice.  We noted the changes made to  the
reaccomplished OPR and that all of the evaluators  signed  the  new  report.
We  also  noted  the  supporting  statements  provided  by  the  rater   and
additional  rater  indicating  that  they  failed  to  add  a   future   job
recommendation which they believe had a significant negative impact  on  the
applicant’s  promotion  opportunity.   The   statement   provided   by   the
applicant’s current reviewing official and the statement made  by  the  AFPC
nonselection counselor add further weight to the applicant’s assertion  that
this oversight may have sent a signal to the  board  about  the  applicant’s
future potential.  Therefore, given the importance  of  job  recommendations
on performance reports and in light of the  overwhelming  evaluator  support
to void the contested report and replace  it  with  the  reaccomplished  OPR
submitted with the application, the applicant’s record should  be  corrected
as indicated below.  In view of the foregoing, and in order  to  offset  any
possibility of an injustice, we further  recommend  that  the  applicant  be
considered for promotion to the  grade  of  lieutenant  colonel  by  Special
Selection Board with the reaccomplished OPR in his records.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air  Force  relating
to APPLICANT be corrected to show that the Field Grade  Officer  Performance
Report (OPR), AF Form 707A, rendered for the period 1 March 1997 through  28
February 1998, be declared void  and  removed  from  his  records,  and  the
reaccomplished OPR reflecting “heading to the Pentagon this  summer--then  a
must for command and SSS!” in Section VI., Rater Overall Assessment, and “--
after his Air Staff tour--select him  for  command  and  send  to  SSS!”  in
Section VII., Additional Rater Overall Assessment, be accepted for  file  in
its place.

It is further recommended that his record be  considered  for  promotion  to
the grade of lieutenant colonel by Special Selection  Board  (SSB)  for  the
Calendar Year 1999B Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board, and  any  subsequent
boards for which the now reaccomplished OPR was not a matter of record.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in  Executive
Session on 4 January 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Christopher Carey, Member
                 Mr. Dale O. Jackson, Member

All members voted to correct the records,  as  recommended.   The  following
documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 14 Sep 2000, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPA, dated 16 Oct 2000.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 27 Oct 2000.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 21 Nov 2000, w/atch.




                                   DAVID C. VAN GASBECK
                                   Panel Chair



AFBCMR 00-02461




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, be corrected to show that the Field Grade Officer Performance
Report (OPR), AF Form 707A, rendered for the period 1 March 1997 through 28
February 1998, be, and hereby is, declared void and removed from his
records, and the reaccomplished OPR reflecting “heading to the Pentagon
this summer--then a must for command and SSS!” in Section VI., Rater
Overall Assessment, and “--after his Air Staff tour--select him for command
and send to SSS!” in Section VII., Additional Rater Overall Assessment, be
accepted for file in its place.

      It is further directed that his record be considered for promotion to
the grade of lieutenant colonel by Special Selection Board (SSB) for the
Calendar Year 1999B Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board, and any subsequent
boards for which the now reaccomplished OPR was not a matter of record.





            JOE G. LINEBERGER
            Director
            Air Force Review Boards Agency
Attachment:
Reaccomplished OPR