RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01968
		INDEX CODE:  111.01

	 	COUNSEL:  NONE

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Officer Performance Report (OPR) rendered for the period 14 June 2000 through 31 January 2001 be declared void and removed from his records.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The contested OPR was unjust due to unclear and conflicting policy/guidance regarding LASIK eye surgery eligibility requirements for members in his career field.  He believes that this entire situation was riddled with misunderstandings and unclear policy.

In support of his request, applicant provided a copy of AF Form 948, Application for Correction/Removal of Evaluation Reports, a copy of the contested OPR, a copy of the USAF aviation and Special Duty Photorefractive Keratectomy (PRK) Waiver and Surveillance Program Policy Letter, a copy of his annual physical examination, a copy of HQ AFSCP/SG Corneal Refractive Surgery Policy, a copy of Exception to Policy letter, a copy of Surgeon General’s Policy Regarding Aviation and Special Duty Photorefractive Keratectomy Waiver and Surveillance Program, a copy of his LASIK Post-Operative Examination and copies of two preceding and two following OPR’s.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Information extracted from the Personnel Data System (PDS) indicates that the applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of captain, having been promoted to that grade on 28 May 2001.  His total active federal military service date (TAFMSD) is 26 May 1997.

On 3 November 2000, the applicant underwent LASIK surgery.  As a result of the surgery, the Personnel Reliability Program (PRP) certifying official permanently decertified the applicant from PRP duties.  He received a referral officer performance report for the period 14 June 2000 trough 31 January 2001.

The applicant filed an appeal under the provisions of AFI 36-2401, Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Reports, 1 December 1997, requesting the contested report be voided.  The Evaluation Report Appeal Board (ERAB) denied the request based on the fact that the statements in the OPR were factual and no evidence was provided by the member to prove otherwise.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSFM recommended denial. The applicant underwent LASIK eye surgery on 3 November 2000 at the advice of XXXXXX optometrist and flight surgeon.  There was no definitive policy guidance in place, at that time, concerning LASIK surgery for Space Missiles Operators.  

As a result of the surgery, the PRP certifying official permanently decertified him from PRP duties IAW AFI 36-2104, Personnel Reliability Program, para A3.3, which states, “Permanent decertification or disqualification indicates the individual has questionable reliability or long-term impaired capability (longer than the temporary timeframe).”  The decertification was based on the long-term impaired capability.  

The commander followed the appropriate procedures to permanently decertify the applicant.  The permanent decertification is valid.  He can apply for a waiver to the permanent decertification now that the LASIK surgery policy and the AF Space Command policy has been modified.  

A complete copy of the DPSFM evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPE strongly recommends denial.  AFI 36-2104, Nuclear Weapons Personnel Reliability Program, paragraph 1.13., specifically states it is the member’s responsibility to inform their commanding officer, “of all health care received (medical, dental, counseling, etc.) to include TDY treatment” and “if a PRP certified person requires treatment from a civilian physician …”  Attachment four further lists minimum items that individuals obtaining PRF certification are briefed on.  Paragraph A4.1.4., states individuals have an obligation to report to their commanding officer any factors or conditions (on and off duty) that could impair their performance…”  The applicant has not provided any documentation to indicate he notified anyone in his chain of command of the surgery, as was his responsibility to do so.  Therefore, the report is an accurate assessment by the rating chain.

The applicant did not provide any evidence that proves he took the responsible steps necessary to research whether or not LASIK eye surgery was allowed for his career field.  “The OPR states a fact that he was disqualified from PRP duties and this affected the mission.”(sic)  It is a moot point that now his career field can have the surgery done since his failure to research and abide by the regulations prohibited him from performing his duties.  Further, AFI 36-2104 specifically indicates it was the applicant’s responsibility to notify his commanding officer of the surgery, which he failed to do.

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

AFPC/DPPPO recommends denial based on the evidence provided, and the recommendation in the DPPPE advisory.

A complete copy of the DPPPO evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant states that the DPSFM advisory confirms that there was no definitive policy or guidance concerning LASIK surgery for Space and Missile Operators.  This statement furthers his contention that Air Force policy and guidance were conflicting and unclear resulting in this situation.

The DPPPE advisory states “Basically, the member had LASIK eye surgery when regulations did not allow it for his career field.”  This statement conflicts with the DPSFM advisory.  The advisory fails to mention that all medical PRP related issues are referred to and decided by the base medical subject matter experts and is their responsibility to inform and advise commanders of all medical related issues affecting squadron members.  He states that he sought approval and guidance from both the flight surgeon and the base optometrist prior to undergoing LASIK vision correction satisfying PRP requirements.

Misinformation, unclear policy and inaccurate guidance lay at the foundation of this predicament.  With the exception of the contested OPR, his performance in the Air Force both prior to and after this event has been outstanding.  He believes this referral OPR that effectively ends his Air Force career is unjust in light of all the facts and circumstances surrounding this situation.

His complete submission is at Exhibit G.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  The evidence of record indicates that the applicant received LASIK surgery on 3 November 2000, and subsequently, was permanently decertified from his PRP duties by the PRP certifying official.  As a result of his decertification from the PRP program, and due to his commander’s belief that the mission was affected due to his actions, the applicant was given a referral OPR.  After a thorough review of the facts and circumstances of this case, we find no evidence, which would lead us to believe that the applicant intentionally intended to deceive those within his chain of command.  It appears that he attempted to comply with the directives and policies in effect at the time to gain permission for the surgery.  It is also noted, that current policy permits LASIK surgery for members of his career field.  Accordingly, in order to remove any injustice to the applicant, we recommend that his records be corrected to the extent indicated below.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

	The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that the Company Grade Officer Performance Report, AF Form 707B, rendered for the period 14 June 2000 through 31 January 2001, be, and hereby is, declared void and removed from his records.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-01968 in Executive Session on 10 December 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

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

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 May 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSFM, dated 1 Aug 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPE, dated 3 Sep 03.

    Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 1 Oct 03.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Oct 03.
	Exhibit G.  Letter, Applicant, dated 24 Oct 03.

                                   

AFBCMR BC-2003-01968

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 APPLICANT, be corrected to show that the Company Grade Officer Performance Report, AF Form 707B, rendered for the period 14 June 2000 through 31 January 2001, be, and hereby is, declared void and removed from his records.