IN THE CASE OF:  

		BOARD DATE: 18 November 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140018686


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests correction of his military records by removing from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) the DA Form 67-9 (Officer Evaluation Report (OER)), for the rated period 28 March 2011 through 15 August 2011, and replacing it with a corrected OER for the same rated period.

2.  The applicant states the wrong OER was submitted to the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) for filing in his OMPF.  He contends that corrections were made to the subject OER after it was reviewed.  Contact was made with both the rater and senior rater who have acknowledged the discrepancy and have tried to correct it without success.

3.  The applicant provides copies of:

* a DA Form 67-9 for the subject rated period, signed in August 2011
* a DA Form 67-9 for the subject rated period, signed in October 2014
* an email communication, from the rater of the subject OER, dated           24 September 2014

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  At the time of his application, the applicant was serving in the Regular Army as a chief warrant officer two (CW2), pay grade W2.



2.  The subject OER for the period 28 March 2011 through 15 August 2011 is a change-of-rater report.  It was not a referred report and does not contain any derogatory comments.  The applicant's performance evaluation for professionalism indicates he met all of the Army's values.  He was rated as "outstanding performance, must promote" and senior rated as "best qualified."  The rater, senior rater, and the applicant all signed the report in August 2011.  The OER was filed in the applicant's OMPF on 6 September 2011.

3.  The corrected copy of the subject OER shows the following changes:

	a.  The dates of signatures for the rater, senior rater, and applicant are in October 2014; and

	b.  The senior rater's comments were changed from: "He is a no nonsense technician who is quick to find immediate, practical solutions to complex problems."  "Promote to CW3." to read as: "He is one of the best in the Brigade, a no nonsense technician who is quick to find immediate, practical solutions to complex problems."  "Promote to CW3 now and send to Warrant Officer Advance Course."

4.  The email communication between the applicant and the rater of the subject OER, dated 24 September 2014, contains a short discussion about the OER and changes that had been decided at some previous point in time.  The rater acknowledged the particular change and offered to do what he could to validate/verify the changed report.  

5.  Army Regulation 623-3 prescribes the policies and tasks for the Army's Evaluation Reporting System.

	a.  Paragraph 1-9 states Army evaluation reports are assessments of how well the rated Soldier met duty requirements and adhered to the professional standards of the Army Officer Corps.  Performance will be evaluated by observing action, demonstrated behavior, and results from the point of view of the values, leadership framework, and responsibilities identified on the evaluation forms, counseling forms, and as explained in the governing pamphlet.

	b.  Paragraph 3-39 states evaluation reports accepted for inclusion in the official record of a Soldier are presumed to be administratively correct, to have been prepared by the proper rating officials, and to represent the considered opinion and objective judgment of rating officials at the time of preparation.



	c.  Paragraph 6-11a states the burden of proof rests with the appellant to justify deletion or amendment of a report.  The appellant will produce evidence that establishes clearly and convincingly that:  (1) the presumption of regularity will not be applied to the report under consideration and (2) action is warranted to correct a material error, inaccuracy, or injustice.  Clear and convincing evidence will be of a strong and compelling nature, not merely proof of the possibility of administrative error or factual inaccuracy.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends his military records should be corrected by removing from his OMPF the OER for the rated period 28 March 2011 through 
15 August 2011 and replacing it with a corrected OER for the same rated period.

2.  The subject OER is a change-of-rater report.  It was not a referred report.  The applicant was rated and senior rated as outstanding and best qualified.  The OER contains no derogatory comments or other discrepancies/inconsistencies.  It was signed by all parties in August 2011 and was filed in the applicant's OMPF in September 2011.

3.  The requested changes to the subject OER appear to have been the result of retrospective thinking several years after the original OER was completed.

4.  Before an OER may be removed from the OMPF, there must be clear and convincing evidence showing it contains a material error, is inaccurate, or is unjust.  The changes requested to the subject OER do not correct any significant material error or injustice.

5.  The subject OER is presumed to be administratively correct, to have been prepared by the proper rating officials, and to represent the considered opinion and objective judgment of rating officials at the time of preparation.  The applicant has not provided clear and convincing evidence of a strong and compelling nature to overcome any presumption of regularity.

6.  In view of the above, the applicant's request should be denied.



BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___X____  ___X_____  ____X____  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.



      _____________X__________
               CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140015121



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140018686



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1