RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03473 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

1. His AF Form 707, Officer Performance Report (Lt thru Col), for 
the period ending 1 Feb 11, be changed. Specifically, Block IV, Rater Overall Assessment, should be changed to read “#2/11 
Flt/CCs, my most versatile instr” rather than “#3/7 CGOs & my 
most versatile Flt/CC.” 

 

2. He be considered for promotion to the grade of major by a 
Special Selection Board for the CY11D (5 Dec 11) Major Central 
Section Board (CSB). 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

His rater acknowledged the error in a signed memorandum dated 
1 Mar 11, 2 weeks after the OPR closed out. Both the additional 
rater and the reviewer agreed that there was an error in his OPR 
and that it should be corrected. He submits a new AF Form 707 to 
replace the original OPR that closed out on 1 Feb 11. 

 

His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant’s OPR for the period of 2 Feb 10 thru 1 Feb 11 
reflects a stratification statement of “3/7 CGOs & my most 
versatile Flt/CC—given any task, he always hits the target; ADO 
now, IDE, & Sq/CC ASAP!” 

 

The applicant’s OPR profile of the last 10 reports follows: 

 

 PERIOD ENDING OVERALL EVALUATION 

 

 19 Sep 03 Training Report (TR) 

 22 Apr 04 Meets Standards (MS) 

 22 Apr 05 MS 

 01 Feb 06 MS 

 01 Feb 07 MS 

 01 Feb 08 MS 


 17 Oct 08 TR 

 01 Feb 09 MS 

 01 Feb 10 MS 

 *01 Feb 11 MS 

 

* Top report at the time he was considered and nonselected for 
promotion by the CY11D Major CSB and Contested Report 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of 
the Air Force, which is at Exhibit C and D. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of removing the applicant’s OPR. 
Although the applicant provides a re-accomplished substitute OPR, 
after carefully considering the memorandum provided by the rating 
chain, the memorandum provides little explanation as to what 
error occurred and why it needs to be changed, or how this 
correction would correct any error or injustice in his case. The 
governing instructions states that the applicant must provide 
strong evidence to overcome the report’s presumed validity. 

 

Additionally, the instructions states that a report is not 
erroneous or unfair because the applicant believes it contributed 
to a non-selection for promotion or may impact future promotions. 
DPSID reminds the Board to keep the promotion and evaluation 
issues separate and focus on the report only. Based on the lack 
of corroborating evidence, they recommend the contested 
evaluation not be replaced with the substitute report because it 
could possibly set precedence. This could allow any optional 
statements that were not originally considered by a promotion 
board to be added at a later date (when supported by the original 
evaluators), which may lead airman to request this statement be 
changed to gain support for supplement promotion consideration. 

 

The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

AFPC/DPSOO recommends denying SSB consideration. The 
reaccomplished OPR provided by the applicant reflects it was 
digitally signed by the additional rater on 21 May 12, the 
reviewer on 22 May 12, and the ratee on 22 May 12, which was 
after the 5 Dec 11 board convening date. Because AFPC/DPSIDEP 
recommended to deny the applicant’s request to substitute his 
1 Feb 11 OPR, they recommend denying SSB consideration. 

 

The complete DPSOO evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 


 

1. He disagrees with the advisories that state he failed to 
provide sufficient evidence to prove his 2011 OPR was erroneous 
or unjust based on the content. Specifically, the stratification 
comment in Block IV, Line 6, should read “#2/11 Flt/CCs, my most 
versatile instr” rather than “#3/7 CGOs & my most versatile 
Flt/CC.” 

 

2. Two days after signing his 2011 OPR, he asked to speak with 
his rater regarding the stratification comment because it was not 
what they had discussed in his feedback session. His rater 
preceeded to tell him that he had made a mistake and that he 
would fix this mistake. The applicant submits documents that 
prove the correction to his OPR was initiated before the CY11D 
Major Promotion board. 

 

3. Contrary to the advisory opinion, he is not trying to get 
anything “added” to his OPR; he only wants his records to reflect 
what he has earned; nothing more and nothing less. 

 

4. The fact remains that his rater, additional rater, and 
reviewer all agreed that there was an administrative error that 
should be corrected. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, 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 error or injustice. In support of 
his contention, the applicant provides credible evidence from his 
rating chain which clearly indicates that his OPR did not 
accurately portray their assessment of his promotion potential. 
Given the unequivocal support from the senior rater, we believe 
that the applicant was improperly disadvantaged due to the error 
in the stratification statement which resulted in an inaccurate 
assessment of his performance and potential. Therefore, we 
recommend approval of the applicant’s request that his OPR be 
corrected to reflect the correct stratification statement and his 
record be considered for promotion to the grade of major by an 
SSB. Therefore, in the interest of equity and justice, we 
recommend that his records be corrected as indicated below. 

 


4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not 
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel 
will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved. 
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: 

 

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force 
relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that his AF Form 707, Officer Performance Report (Lt thru Col), rendered for the period 
2 February 2010 through 1 February 2011, be amended in Block IV, Rater Overall Assessment, Line 6, to reflect “#2/11 Flt/CCs, my 
most versatile instr,” rather than “#3/7 CGOs & my most versatile 
Flt/CC.” 

 

It is further recommended that he be considered for promotion to 
the grade of major by a Special Selection Board for the Calendar 
Year 2011D Major Central Selection Board and any subsequent 
boards for which the above corrected OPR was a matter of record. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2012-03473 in Executive Session on 16 Apr 13, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

, Panel Chair 

, Member 

, Member 

 

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

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Jul 12, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 4 Sep 12. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOO, dated 27 Sep 12. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Oct 12. 

 Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant, dated 15 Nov 12. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair