ADDENDUM TO
                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-03546
            INDEX CODE:  112.00, 131.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

In the applicant’s request for  reconsideration,  he  requests  the  Officer
Performance Report (OPR) rendered for the period 29 August 1992  through  28
August 1993, be declared void and replaced with a reaccomplished OPR.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving on extended active duty in the  grade  of
major.

Applicant was considered and not selected for  promotion  to  the  grade  of
lieutenant colonel by the CY02B and CY03A  (12  November  2002  and  8  July
2003) Lieutenant Colonel  Central  Selection  Boards.   Applicant’s  Officer
Performance Reports (OPRs) from 1991 through 2003  reflect  meets  standards
on all performance factors.

The applicant’s request that the Officer Performance Report  (OPR)  rendered
for the period 29 August 1992 through 28 August 1993, be declared  void  and
replaced with a reaccomplished OPR was considered  and  denied  by  the  Air
Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) on  25  March  2004,
see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit G.

On 18 February 2005, the applicant submitted a request for  reconsideration,
contending the 1993 OPR in question was  erroneous  as  filed.   To  support
this assertion, the applicant provided a letter from Colonel B--- W---,  who
states he was the  applicant’s  squadron  commander  during  the  period  in
question.  The applicant’s complete  submission,  with  attachments,  is  at
Exhibit H.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

Having  reviewed  the  applicant’s  recent  submission  and   the   evidence
provided, the Board majority is not persuaded  a  revision  of  the  earlier
decision in this case is warranted.   The  Board  majority  believes  it  is
significant the  contested  report  was  rendered  approximately  ten  years
before the applicant’s initial request for its  removal  and  nearly  twelve
years before this  request  for  reconsideration  was  submitted.   We  have
considered the applicant’s contentions, the  statements  by  the  rater  and
reviewer of the contested report and the recently-submitted statement by  an
officer who indicates he was the  applicant’s  squadron  commander  at  that
time.  The latter individual and the applicant now  appear  to  contend  the
applicant’s  primary  duty  title  was  “Training  Flight  Instructor  Radar
Navigator” during the period in  question,  rather  than  as  an  additional
duty, as originally indicated in  the  appeal.   The  Board  majority  notes
there is no support for this change by the officers charged  with  reporting
on and evaluating the applicant’s performance during the period  covered  by
the report.  The Board majority agrees with the earlier Panel  who  reviewed
this application and is not convinced by the statements  of  the  rater  and
reviewer that their assessments of the  applicant’s  duty  performance  were
inaccurate at the time  they  were  written.   The  only  substantive  issue
discussed by the cited evaluators in  their  statements,  other  than  vague
references to other additional accomplishments,  is  the  additional  duties
the  applicant  performed  as  an  instructor.   In  the  Board   majority’s
estimate, this does not render the original assessments of  the  applicant’s
performance inaccurate since the evaluators could have included all  of  the
information at that time.  Generally, it has been our view that a report  is
considered accurate unless it  is  shown  that  it  is  based  on  erroneous
information, or factors other than a member’s  performance,  or  that  there
was significant information  not  available  at  the  time  the  report  was
prepared that would have an impact on the evaluation.  In the instant  case,
the Board majority believes the evaluators’ wholesale accomplishment of  the
report so long after the rating period is a well-intentioned after the  fact
effort to enhance the applicant’s promotability --  an  inappropriate  basis
on  which  to  favorably  consider  his  request.   Accordingly,  the  Board
majority affirms the earlier decision by the Board to deny  the  applicant’s
request for substitution of  the  contested  report  with  a  reaccomplished
report.

________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD:

A majority of the panel finds insufficient evidence of  error  or  injustice
and recommends the application be denied.

________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in  Executive
Session on 4 October 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

            Ms. B. J. White-Olson, Panel Chair
            Ms. Jean A. Reynolds, Member
            Ms. Josephine L. Davis, Member

By a majority vote, the Board recommended denial of  the  application.   Ms.
Jean A. Reynolds voted to correct the records but does not desire to  submit
a Minority Report.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit G.  Record of Proceedings, dated 28 Apr 04, w/atchs.
      Exhibit H.  Applicant's Request for Reconsideration, w/atchs.




                                   B. J. WHITE-OLSON
                                   Panel Chair






AFBCMR BC-2003-03546





MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD
                 FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR)

SUBJECT:  AFBCMR Application of

      I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the
recommendation of the Board members.  A majority found that applicant
had not provided substantial evidence of error or injustice and
recommended the case be denied.  I concur with that finding and their
conclusion that relief is not warranted.  Accordingly, I accept their
recommendation that the application be denied.

      Please advise the applicant accordingly.




                                        JOE G. LINEBERGER
                                        Director
                                        Air Force Review Boards Agency




MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD FOR
                          CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR)

SUBJECT:  , AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-03546

        I have carefully considered all the circumstances of this case and
do not agree with the majority decision of the panel that the applicant’s
request for replacement of his Officer Performance Report closing 28 August
1993 with a reaccomplished report should be denied.

        In arriving at my decision, I note the applicant’s contentions, the
statements by the rater and reviewer of the contested report and the
recently submitted statement by an officer who indicates he was the
applicant’s squadron commander at that time.  Having no basis to question
the integrity of these officials, the benefit of the doubt should be
resolved in favor of the applicant.  Given the unanimous support from the
rating chain, I recommend that the original Officer Performance Report
(OPR) rendered for the period 29 August 1992 through 28 August 1993 be
declared void, and that the reaccomplished OPR be substituted for the
voided OPR.  However, in the absence of support from the Management Level
Evaluation Board (MLEB) president, I reaffirm denying of the request for
substitution of the Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF).

        Although not specifically requested by the applicant in his most
recent submission, in view of my approval of his request for substitution
of the contested report, in order to preclude any possibility of a
promotion injustice to the applicant, he should be afforded Special
Selection Board (SSB) considerations for promotion by all the appropriate
selection boards.





            JOE G. LINEBERGER
            Director
            Air Force Review Boards Agency



AFBCMR BC-2003-03546




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 Company Grade Officer Performance Report, AF Form 707B,
rendered for the period 29 August 1992 through 28 August 1993, be, and
hereby is, declared void and removed from his records.

        b.  The attached reaccomplished Company Grade Officer Performance
Report, AF Form 707B, rendered for the period 29 August 1992 through 28
August 1993, be accepted for file in its proper sequence.

      It is further directed that he be considered for promotion to the
grade of lieutenant colonel by Special Selection Board for the Calendar
Year 2002B (CY02B) Central Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board, and for any
subsequent board for which the OPR closing 28 August 1993 was a matter of
record.









   JOE G. LINEBERGER

   Director

   Air Force Review Boards Agency

Attachment:
Reaccomplished OPR