RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:					DOCKET NUMBER:  01-00126
								INDEX CODE:  111.01

								COUNSEL:  NONE

								HEARING DESIRED:  NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Officer Performance Report (OPR) rendered for the period 1 Mar 99 through 15 Jan 00 be declared void and removed from his records.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The contested report does not meet Air Force standards for a valid referral report and no performance feedback, contrary to information included in the OPR, from the rater was given stating he was performing below standards.  No disciplinary or administrative actions were taken to apprise him of any perceived shortfall in leadership.  This report was written because he requested a medical reassignment based upon a preexisting medical condition.  The OPR was written out of spite and does not support the position of substandard performance.

Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant’s Total Active Federal Military Service Date (TAFMSD) is 8 Oct 85.  He is currently serving on extended active duty in the grade of major, effective, and with a date of rank (DOR) of 1 Nov 97.

Applicant’s OPR profile since 1991 follows:

            PERIOD ENDING          OVERALL EVALUATION

             14 Jun 91              Meets Standards (MS)
             19 Dec 91              MS
             14 May 93        Education/Training Report (TR)
             14 May 94              MS
             16 Dec 94              TR
             14 May 95              MS
             29 Feb 96              MS
             28 Feb 97              MS
             28 Feb 98              MS
             28 Feb 99              MS
           * 15 Jan 00    Does Not Meet Standards (Referral Rpt)

     *  Contested report.

A similar appeal to remove the contested OPR was submitted to the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB) under AFI 36‑2401 which was denied.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Chief, Performance Evaluation Section, AFPC/DPPPEP, reviewed this application and indicated that a rater’s failure to conduct a required or requested feedback session does not, by itself, invalidate any subsequent OPR or Promotion Recommendation Forms (PRFs).  Feedback is not only the rater’s responsibility, the ratee notifies the rater and, if necessary, the additional rater if a required feedback session did not take place and requests the feedback session as needed.

DPPPEP states that an OPR must be referred when an “evaluator marks ‘Does Not Meet Standards’ in any performance factor in Section V” or when “comments in the OPR, or the attachments, refer to behavior incompatible with standards of personal or professional conduct, character, or integrity.”  The applicant believes he was given a referral OPR solely on his recurring medical condition, not his duty performance.  However, his evaluator’s contend in the OPR that he was removed from command due to a combination of medical concerns and ineffectiveness.  There is no prohibition on mentioning a medical condition in the evaluation especially if it affects duty performance.  The evaluator’s are required to take all performance factors into account when writing an evaluation and if the medical condition is hindering duty performance, it may be documented on the evaluation.  By applicant’s own admission, in his rebuttal letter to his referral OPR, he was given verbal feedback stating he was “deficient” in several areas.  These deficiencies may have impacted the additional rater’s comments/performance ratings.  It would be necessary to hear from the members of the rating chain, not only for support but also for clarification/explanation.  Without rating chain support, DPPPEP has to believe the report was rendered in good faith by all evaluators.  Based on the information presented, DPPPEP recommends denial of applicant’s request.

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

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and provided a three-page response, stating, in part, that he was never given any indication there were problems with his duty performance.  His supporting package shows the squadron improved markedly under his leadership in many areas and the only feedback he did receive was in fact positive from his evaluators.  After reading the contested OPR, you will not be able to determine what he did wrong to justify a referral report and why this flawed report should ruin his career.  He believes the report was written to punish him for requesting a medical transfer before his condition interfered with his duties as a squadron commander.  The report was written without any justification or supporting documentation to back up the Air Force position of substandard performance.

Applicant’s complete response is attached 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.	Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.  After reviewing the evidence of record, we believe that the applicant’s performance was based on factors other than his actual performance of duties.  It appears the applicant received the “Does Not Meet Standards” rating in Section V (Performance Factors) because he requested a medical reassignment based on a preexisting medical condition.  We do not believe that this factor should have influenced the assessment of his performance.  In our opinion, the comments on the contested report are vague in nature and do not cite any specifics on ineffectiveness or substandard performance.  While the applicant failed to provide supporting statements from the rater and additional rater of the report in question, after noting the statement of the additional rater, in his pen and ink note of 30 Oct 99, in which he states he and the rater were proud of applicant’s work, we believe that some doubt exists as to the accuracy of the report.  In view of the above and the fact that the contested report represents a regression in his otherwise outstanding performance history, and in order to eliminate any doubt and possible injustice to the applicant, we recommend that the OPR in question be declared void and removed from his records.

___________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that the Field Grade Officer Performance Report, AF Form 707A, rendered for the period 1 Mar 99 through 15 Jan 00, be declared void and removed from his records.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 24 April 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

	            Vice Chair
	            Member
              Member

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

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Jan 01, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPEP, dated 7 Feb 01.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 23 Mar 01.
     Exhibit E.  Letter fr applicant, dated 2 Apr 01.

                                   
                                   Vice Chair

INDEX CODE:  111.01

AFBCMR 01-00126

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, be corrected to show that the Field Grade Officer Performance Report, AF Form 707A, rendered for the period 1 March 1999 through 15 January 2000, be, and hereby is, declared void and removed from his records.