RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01603

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Officer Performance Report (OPR) rendered for the period 13 Jun 98 through 12 Jun 99 be declared void and removed from his records.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Corrections were made to the contested referral report which added information and changed the content/meaning of the report without an additional referral to the ratee for review and rebuttal.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provided an expanded statement and copies of the contested report.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant’s available military personnel records indicate that he was voluntarily ordered to extended active duty on 1 Jun 94 as a second lieutenant.

He was voluntarily discharged from all appointments in the Air Force on 23 Jun 00 under the provisions of AFI 36-3207 (Misconduct) and furnished a general discharge.  He was credited with 6 years and 23 days of active service.

Applicant's OPR profile follows:

	PERIOD ENDING	EVALUATION

	31 May 95			Meets Standards
	31 May 96			Meets Standards
	18 Feb 97			Meets Standards
	12 Jun 98			Training Report
  * 	12 Jun 99	  Did Not Meet Standards (Referral)
	12 Jun 00			Meets Standards

* Contested Report.

Pursuant to the Board’s request, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Clarksburg, West Virginia, provided a copy of an investigation report, which is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPE recommended denial indicating the applicant never noted that the comments on the report, concerning the two driving under the influences (DUIs) he received and not reporting them to the commander, were false.  He only contended that the report was not administered correctly.  According to AFI 36-2402, the report was administered correctly and, with no argument from the applicant, the information on the report was also correct.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPPE evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant indicated that due to the facts proving the report was not only administered incorrectly but also contained false information, he reiterates his request to have the contested report voided and removed from his records.

Applicant’s complete response, with attachment, is at Exhibit F.

A copy of the FBI Report was forwarded to applicant on 15 Sep 03 for review and response.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit G).

_________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPE noted the applicant’s rebuttal and indicated that they stand by their initial assessment of the applicant’s case.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPPE evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit H.

AFPC/JA recommended denial indicating that the applicant has failed to present relevant evidence of any error or injustice warranting any relief.  Should the Board decide to provide some remedy to the applicant, they believe the deletion of a comment in the contested OPR referencing his conviction for driving while intoxicated (DWI) is more appropriate than removal of the entire report.  However, in their view, this reference is, at most, a technical error that is harmless under the circumstances and requires no remedy.

A complete copy of the AFPC/JA evaluation is at Exhibit I.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the additional Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on 19 Dec 03 for review and response.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit J).

_________________________________________________________________

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.  The applicant’s complete submission was thoroughly reviewed and his contentions were duly noted.  However, we do not find the applicant’s uncorroborated assertions and the documentation presented in support of his appeal sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPRs).  No clear-cut evidence has been presented which shows to our satisfaction that the OPR closing 12 Jun 99 was an inaccurate depiction of his performance at the time it was originally prepared.  We took note of the applicant’s argument that the OPR erroneously contained comments that he was convicted for a DWI because the disposition of the case was deferred adjudication.  However, we agree with AFPC/JA’s assessment that the reference in the OPR to the conviction was a harmless, technical error.  In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we agree with the recommendations of the OPRs and adopt their rationale as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of establishing that he has suffered either an error or an injustice.  Accordingly, the applicant’s request that his OPR closing 12 Jun 99 be voided and removed from his records is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

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-2003-01603 in Executive Session on 10 Feb 04, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 6 May 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  FBI Report.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPE, dated 16 Jun 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Jun 03.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, applicant, dated 7 Jul 03, w/atch.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 15 Sep 03.
    Exhibit H.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPE, dated 20 Nov 03, w/atch.
    Exhibit I.  Letter, AFPC/JA, dated 1 Dec 03.
    Exhibit J.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Dec 03.

                                   Panel Chair