RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2017-03580

	COUNSEL: 

	HEARING: YES

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Officer Performance Report (OPR) rendered for the period 1 Jun 14 through 31 May 15, be removed from his records.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His response and submissions to the referral OPR were not made part of the OPR permanent record.  The referral comments were vague such that they did not put him on sufficient notice as to why he was receiving a referral OPR.  Further, the midterm feedback was not accomplished in the reporting period.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is a retired Air Force major with 20 years and 9 days of active service.

The applicant did file an Evaluation Review Appeal Board (ERAB) application and was denied relief to void the contested OPR, as the board was not convinced of an error or injustice. 

For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisory at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DP3SP recommends denying the application.  Based on the documentation provided by the applicant and analysis of the facts, there is no evidence of an error or injustice in reference to the contested evaluation.  The applicant has not provided compelling evidence from credible officials (i.e. an evaluator on the contested report or Inspector General) to show that the report is unjust or inaccurate as written. Additionally, the applicant was afforded the opportunity to provide the rebuttal document for inclusion into his ARMS record but failed to do so.  The applicant did file an Evaluation Review Appeal Board (ERAB) application and was denied relief to void the contested OPR as the board was not convinced of an error or injustice rather than an administrative correction to add the missing rebuttal document.  In the ERAB application, the board stated, "the rebuttal should be made part of the record if the applicant has them;" however, the applicant did not provide the rebuttal document to AFPC/DP2SPE for inclusion into the ARMS record.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Board sent a copy of the Air Force evaluation to the applicant on 31 May 18 for comment (Exhibit D), but has received no response.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The application was timely filed.

2.  The applicant exhausted all available avenues of non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.  After thoroughly reviewing all Exhibits, it is the Board’s opinion that the applicant is not the victim of an error and injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of AFPC/DP3SP and find that a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

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 the Board’s understanding of the issues involved.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The applicant be informed the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice, and the application will only be reconsidered upon receipt of relevant evidence not already considered by the Board.

CERTIFICATION:

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2017-03580 in Executive Session on 11 Jul 18:

All members voted not to correct the record.  The panel considered the following:

            Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 4 Aug 17.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion, AFPC/DP3SP, atchs, not dated.
Exhibit D:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 31 May 18.
Exhibit E:	E-Mail Communique, atch, dated 13 Jun 18.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9 pertaining to Docket Number BC-2017-03580.