RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00881
INDEX CODE: 111.01
XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 23 SEPTEMBER 2008
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The Officer Performance Reports (OPRs) closing out on 30 Apr 93, 30
Apr 96 and 20 Jan 98 be declared void and removed from his records.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The contested reports are unjust because they contain comments in
reference to race and family activities.
In support of his request, the applicant provided copies of the
contested reports.
His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant was commissioned a second lieutenant in the Regular Air
Force on 7 February 1992 and was progressively promoted to the grade
of captain. He is assigned in Los Angles AFB, CA as the Chief, Space
Logistics Branch.
The following is a resume of the applicant’s OPR profile:
PERIOD ENDINGS OVERALL EVALUATION
3 Aug 06 MEETS STANDARDS (MS)
3 Aug 05 MS
3 Aug 04 MS
8 Sep 03 MS
3 Feb 03 MS
3 Jun 02 MS
3 Jun 01 MS
30 Sep 00 MS
11 May 00 MS
1 Jul 99 MS
1 Jul 98 MS
*20 Jan 98 MS
20 Jan 97 MS
*30 Apr 96 MS
30 Apr 95 MS
30 Apr 94 MS
*30 Apr 93 MS
* - Contested Reports
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPPEP recommends denial. DPPPEP states the AFI 36-2402 does not
prohibit evaluators from commenting on involvement in cultural
activities or additional duties but cautions against the use of
specific references to the individual's ethnic background.
Participation in the activities mentioned in the bullet statements is
not limited to people of a specific race, in fact any officer can be
asked to be an escort for any distinguished visitor (DV) without
regard to race. As Air Force members, we all participate in and are
encouraged to be a committee member on cultural heritage committees.
The bullets in his OPR do not address his race, only that he
participated in officially recognized Air Force cultural heritage
awareness committees and activities and was assigned the additional
duty of being a DV escort (heritage committee and Tuskegee Airman
reference). AFI 36-2401, Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation
Reports, paragraph 1.4.16, states not to consider or include
information regarding employment, education, or volunteer service
activities of the officer's family. This paragraph only addresses the
activities of the family member not the active duty member. The
bullets concerning volunteer work with Big Brothers are authorized per
AFI 36-2402. In all cases, the raters are in full compliance with the
governing AFI.
A complete copy of the DPPPEP evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant responded by stating the instructions on the OPR form
clearly states to focus on what the officer did, how well he or she
did it and how well the officer contributed to mission accomplishment.
He does not understand how any comment outside duty performance is
acceptable. The form does not ask what a subordinate does for
cultural awareness or family activities. In addition, job performance
bullets are key on reports for future leadership assignments and
promotion opportunities. Irrelevant bullets not pertaining to mission
impact stating non-duty activities alluding to race or ethnic
background may not provide an impartial judgment of ones records for
promotion. These comments are best placed in quarterly or annual
award submissions. The applicant states several cultural events in
his reports contain either black or African American. He believes
this is considered leading the witness in our judicial. The applicant
ask if the comments have the potential to create a biased reflection
for promotion or other leadership opportunities based on alluding to
ones racial background or non-duty related performance statements? Do
the statements directly contradict with the AFI in relation to the
instructions given on the OPR and if so, shouldn't the AFI or the OPR
form itself be revised to reflect the same information? Should
comments outside the performance be placed on quarterly award packages
where they belong and not on the OPR? Finally, the applicant asks if
anyone would want comments on their evaluation alluding to martial
status, sex, age, race or income.
His complete response, with attachments, 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. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice. After reviewing the evidence of
record, the Board is not persuaded that the contested reports should
be declared void and removed from his records. The Board is not
persuaded by the applicant's assertions that the comments contained in
the report were in error or contrary to the provisions of the
governing instruction or that the applicant was rated unfairly.
Therefore, the Board agrees with the opinion and recommendation of the
Air Force and adopts its rationale as basis for their conclusion that
the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. In
the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board finds no compelling
basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the
application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the
application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly
discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application.
_______________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2007-00881 in Executive Session on 13 June 2007, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Panel Chair
Ms. Renee M. Collier, Member
Ms. Barbara R. Murray, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 March 2007, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPEP Letter, dated 18 April 2007.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 April 2007.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 24 May 2007.
MICHAEL V. BARBINO
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00883
Additionally, the applicant was given 10 days to comment on the report and informed he could appeal the report under AFI, 36- 2401, Correction of Airman and Officer Evaluation Reports. The applicant did not file an appeal under the provisions of AFI 36-2401, Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Reports. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2007-00883 in Executive Session on 19 July 2007, under...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03160
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03160 INDEX CODE: 131.01, 107.00 COUNSEL: RAYMUNDO LUEVANOS HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 26 APR 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. The ratee did not provide any supporting evidence to prove the report contains any inaccurate information. ...
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00410 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO SEP 2 9 APPLICANT REOUESTS THAT: His Officer Performance Reports (OPRs), closing 13 August 1993 and 4 June 1994, be replaced with the reaccomplished reports provided; and, that he be considered for promotion to lieutenant colonel by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for the CY97C (21 Jul 97) Lieutenant Colonel Board (P0597C), with the corrected...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-00318 INDEX NUMBER: 131.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The close-out date of his 30 Jul 99 Officer Performance Report (OPR) be changed to 13 Jul 99; and that Sections VI (Rater Overall Assessment), line 9, and VII (Additional Rater Overall Assessment), line 5, on the OPR closing 6 March...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00777
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00777 INDEX CODE: 111.05 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE: 14 OCTOBER 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) for the period 30 Jul 2001 thru 29 Jul 2002 be amended or removed from his records. DPPPEP states the applicant did not file an appeal under the...
CG | BCMR | OER and or Failure of Selection | 2007-121
Officer did not evaluate others during reporting period. In Block 10, the reporting officer did not recommend the applicant for promotion, operational assignments, or positions of increased responsibility, and instead wrote, “His leadership and professional skills are poor.” The reviewer authenticated the OER without comment. The reporting officer declared that the disputed OER was based on the applicant’s performance as measured against the OER standards expected of all Coast Guard...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-01510-3
__________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Pursuant to the Board’s request, AFPC/DPPPE reevaluated the applicant’s case based on the newly submitted evidence. Counsel states that there is no way the 120 day requirement to do a report was not met and states that the contested OPR should be expunged and the applicant considered for promotion by SSB. Therefore, the Board majority recommends the applicant’s records be corrected as...
In support of his request, applicant submits a personal statement, a copy of the contested OPR and reaccomplished OPR, a copy of the contested PRF and revised PRF, statements of support from his rating chain and Management Level Review (MLR) President, the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB) decision and additional documents associated with the issues cited in his contentions (Exhibit A). _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00890
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00890 INDEX CODE: 111.02 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 23 SEPTEMBER 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Officer Performance Report (OPR) rendered for the period 28 April 2003 through 1 February 2004 be removed from his records. The DPPPEP complete evaluation is at...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04654
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04654 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Officer Performance Report (OPR) with a closeout date of 28 May 01 be removed from his records. The applicant provides letters of support from his rater and additional rater; however, he has not provided a statement from the reviewer. The DPSID...