RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF				DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2017-04390

XXXXXXXXXXXXXX				COUNSEL: XXXXXXX

							HEARING: NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her officer performance report (OPR) for the period 15 May 15 to 15 Sep 15, be removed from her record.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The referred OPR is untrue and unjust.  The OPR was referred on the basis of removing her from command because she failed to adequately improve a squadron with a pre-existing unhealthy command climate.  There was no misconduct or unprofessional behavior, only that she did not achieve the improvements in unit morale her supervisors had hoped for.  This is not a proper basis for a referral OPR.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is an Air Force lieutenant colonel.  

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.  

The applicant did file an Evaluation Review Appeal Board (ERAB) applicant, which denied relief to void the contested OPR.  

The referral comments on the contested OPR, “unable to affect needed changes as cmdr” and “I lost confidence in your leadership as a direct result of failing to meet the expectations of Air Force commanders as outlined in AFI 102.  Specifically, you failed to establish a healthy command climate, have a propensity for action or deliberately execute the duties and responsibilities associated with executing the mission, leading people, managing resources, and improving the unit” do not violate any provisions in AFI 36-2406, Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Systems.

The applicant has not provided sufficient evidence to challenge the validity of the contested OPR.  There is not sufficient evidence of an error or injustice.  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 11 Jun 18 for comment (Exhibit D), and the applicant replied on 15 Jun 18.  The applicant contended the driving force of the commander’s concern is with the allegation of failing to “establish a healthy command climate” which is exactly the subject of the DEOMI Organizational Climate Survey (DEOCS), based on anonymous allegations that predated the applicant’s command.  Furthermore, the applicant was removed from command due to a command climate which pre-existed her, as is demonstrated by the comment “You (applicant) inherited a squadron with an unhealthy command climate and attempted to make improvements” which is an improper basis for a referral OPR.  

The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit E.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES:

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 or injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of AFPC/DP3SP and finds that a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS:  

The applicant be informed that 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-2017-04390 in Executive Session on 21 Aug 18:

	, Panel Chair
	, Panel Member
	, Panel Member

All members voted not to correct the record.  The panel considered the following regarding AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2017-04390:

Exhibit A:  Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 29 Aug 17.
Exhibit B:  Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:  Advisory opinion, AFPC/DP3SP, dated 18 May 18.
Exhibit D:  Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 11 Jun 18.
Exhibit E:  Applicant’s response, dated 15 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.