RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBERS: 02-00945

                       COUNSEL:  None

                       HEARING DESIRED:  YES
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Field Grade Officer Performance Report (OPR)  for  the  period  13
June 1999 through 31  March  2000  be  removed  and  replaced  with  a
reaccomplished  report  covering  the  same  period   and   be   given
consideration by Special Selection Board (SSB) for the  Calendar  Year
2000A (CY00A) and  Calendar  Year  2001B  (CY01B)  Lieutenant  Colonel
Central Selection Boards.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The generation and approval of  the  OPR  in  his  record  during  the
subject   period   were   performed   under   extremely    prejudicial
circumstances.  In January  of  2000,  a  security  investigation  was
opened based upon what he was eventually able  to  prove  were  poorly
worded security documentation passed  through  the  hands  of  several
individuals and misunderstood/misinterpreted.  The charges, refutation
thereof, and the completed package decided in his favor on all counts,
is Block 10 attachment 5.

Applicant's complete submissions are attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving on  extended  active  duty  in  the
grade of major with a date of rank of April 1997.

Applicant was considered but not selected for promotion to  the  grade
of lieutenant colonel  by  the  CY00A  and  CY01B  central  lieutenant
colonel selection boards.

On 30 November 2001, the applicant submitted an appeal  regarding  the
31 March 2000 OPR to the Evaluation Report Appeals Board  (ERAB).  His
request was reviewed by the ERAB and determined the evidence does  not
warrant voiding the  report.   The  ERAB  was  not  convinced  by  the
applicant's documentation provided to the board.



OER/OPR profile since 1992, follows:

           PERIOD ENDING          EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL

                       30 Jan 92  Meets Standards
                       30 Jan 93  Meets Standards
                       16 Aug 93  Meets Standards
                       16 Aug 94  Meets Standards
                       16 Aug 95  Meets Standards
                       16 Aug 96  Meets Standards
                       27 Jun 97  Meets Standards
                       12 Jun 98  Meets Standards
                       12 Jun 99  Meets Standards
                 *     31 Mar 00  Meets Standards
             #   31 Mar 01   Meets Standards


* Contested report
# Top report reviewed by promotion board

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted
from the applicant's military records are  contained  in  the  letters
prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit  C  and
D.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPE recommended denied.  That office indicates that there is no
evidence of error or injustice on the original OPR.  A report  is  not
erroneous or unfair because the applicant believes it contributed to a
nonselection for promotion or may impact future  promotion  or  career
opportunities. The applicant alleges that the  rater  was  unaware  of
many of his accomplishments during the rating period because the rater
did not have the security clearance to observe these  accomplishments.
The applicant states, "some details of his accomplishments were  later
deemed releasable, and are the source of his rater revised opinion  of
his work.  After careful review, the rater has not  included  any  new
accomplishments to the revised OPR; he  has  merely  strengthened  the
bullets making them "harder hitting" and made  a  stronger  assignment
recommendation. Nonselection for promotion is, for many,  a  traumatic
event, and the  desire  to  overturn  that  nonselection  is  powerful
motivation to appeal.  However, it is important to keep the  promotion
and evaluation issues separated, and to focus on the evaluation report
only.  A simple willingness by evaluators  to  upgrade  or  rewrite  a
report is not a valid basis for doing so.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit C.



AFPC/DPPPO concurs with the findings in the DPPPE  advisory  and  have
nothing further to add.  They  believe  that  since  DPPPE  recommends
disapproval, an SSB consideration is not warranted.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant states that the members of his supervisory chain were not in
a position to provide a correct  evaluation  of  performance  for  the
period of the OPR in question.  On the one hand, with  the  action  in
progress they felt uneasy providing a  glowing  recommendation  of  an
officer whose record had clearly come into question at the  time.   On
the other hand, they could not assume his guilt, so the  OPR  approved
for release was one that was noncommittal  as  to  the  value  of  his
contribution.  Only with the completion of the security  investigation
in  his  favor  could  they  conclude   that   his   opportunity   for
consideration for promotion was inappropriately damaged by the  nature
of his evaluations during the process.  He was  both  denied  the  PCS
that would have put him in  a  headquarters  position  (which  affects
promotion selection) and the opportunity to continue the work  on  his
active programs during the remaining period of the OPR.  The  activity
his office was involved in from January till his projected PCS date in
April would have put him in a position to interact directly  with  the
Directors of the National Security Agency (NSA), the Secretary of  the
Air Force, and key directors of special programs  throughout  the  DOD
and CIA - substantial additional OPR fodder.  The only  recourse  left
to his rating chain in  this  appeal  was  to  merely  strengthen  the
bullets on his activities preceding the investigation.   The  work  he
should have performed was not possible to evaluate.  Had  he  PCSd  on
time to the Pentagon, he would have had enough time there to  get  yet
another OPR from his new duty station reflecting his contribution to a
National priority activity.

He notes in the recommendation from DPPPE that  the  ERAB  denial  was
based upon the fact that an attempt to make the OPR  "harder  hitting"
is  before  it  becomes  a  matter  of  record.   Since  the  security
investigation did not finally conclude and send back  all  appropriate
paperwork until August of  the  following  year,  this  was  obviously
impossible.  The members of his rating chain all believed that  proper
submission of his record was not accomplished - the letters from rater
and senior rater, and the signature from his endorsing General are all
clear evidence of this fact.

Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________


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 error or injustice.  In support of his contention,
the applicant provided credible evidence from his rating chain,  which
had led us to believe that the contested OPR closing out 31 March 2000
did  not  accurately  portray  their  assessment  of   his   promotion
potential.  Given the unequivocal support from the  senior  Air  Force
officers involved, and having  no  plausible  reason  to  doubt  their
integrity in this matter, we believe that the contested OPR should  be
declared void and replaced with a corrected OPR, and that he should be
considered by SSB for promotion to the grade  of  lieutenant  colonel.
Therefore, in view of  the  above  findings,  we  recommend  that  his
records be corrected to the extent indicated below.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

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

      a.  The Field Grade Officer Performance Report  (OPR),  rendered
for the period 13 June 1999 through 31 March 2000, be, and hereby  is,
declared void and removed from his records.

      b.  The attached OPR, rendered  for  the  period  13  June  1999
through 31 March 2000, be amended to show the report was signed by the
rater on 11 May 2000, the additional rater on 12  May  2000,  and  the
reviewer on 21 May 2000; and the report be placed in  his  records  in
its proper sequence.

It is further recommended that he be considered for promotion  to  the
grade of lieutenant colonel by  a  Special  Selection  Board  for  the
Calander Year 2000A (CY00A) Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board
and for any subsequent boards in which the above correction was not  a
matter of record.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket  Number  02-00945
in Executive Session on 29 January 2003, under the provisions  of  AFI
36-2603:

                  Mr. Philip Sheuerman, Panel Chairman
                  Ms. Martha Evans, Member
                  Mr. Joseph A. Roj, Member


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

   Exhibit A.  DD Forms 149, dated 11 Mar 02 w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPE, dated 23 Apr 02.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPO, dated 28 Jun 97.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Jul 02.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 2 Aug 02.





                                       PHILIP SHEUERMAN
                                       Panel Chairman
AFBCMR 02-00945





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 APPLICANT, be corrected to show that

      a.  The Field Grade Officer Performance Report  (OPR),  rendered
for the period 13 June 1999 through 31 March 2000, be, and hereby  is,
declared void and removed from his records.

      b.  The attached OPR,  rendered  for  the  period  13  June  1999
through 31 March 2000, be amended to show the report was signed by  the
rater on 11 May 2000, the additional rater  on  12 May  2000,  and  the
reviewer on 21 May 2000; and the report be placed in his records in its
proper sequence.

It is further recommended that he be considered for promotion  to  the
grade of lieutenant colonel by  a  Special  Selection  Board  for  the
Calander Year 2000A (CY00A) Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board
and for any subsequent boards in which the above correction was not  a
matter of record.





   JOE G. LINEBERGER

   Director

   Air Force Review Boards Agency

Attachment:
OPR, dated 21 Oct 01