DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
WASHINGTON DC
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY
AFI36-2406_AFGM2024-01
17 January 2024
MEMORANDUM FOR DISTRIBUTION C
MAJCOMs/FLDCOMs/FOAs/DRUs
FROM: SAF/MR
1040 Air Force Pentagon
Washington, DC 20330-1040
SUBJECT: Air Force Guidance Memorandum to Air Force Instruction 36-2406, Officer and Enlisted
Evaluations Systems
By Order of the Secretary of the Air Force, this Air Force Guidance Memorandum immediately
changes Department of the Air Force Instruction (DAFI) 36-2406, Officer and Enlisted Evaluations
Systems. Compliance with this memorandum is mandatory. To the extent its directions are inconsistent
with other Department of the Air Force publications, the information herein prevails in accordance with
DAFI 90-160, Publications and Forms Management and Department of the Air Force Manual
(DAFMAN) 90-161, Publishing Processes and Procedures. This guidance is applicable to the Regular
Air Force, Air Force Reserve, and the Air National Guard.
This memorandum establishes this publication as an Air Force Instruction and updates AF Form
716, Enlisted Performance Brief, as a dynamic evaluation form for all United States Air Force enlisted
grades. Further, the guidance in this publication no longer applies to members of the United States Space
Force; policy in SpFI 36-2401, Guardian Evaluations Systems, prevails.
Ensure all records created as a result of processes prescribed in this publication are maintained in
accordance with AFI 33-322, Records Management and Information Governance Program, and disposed
of in accordance with the Air Force Records Disposition Schedule (RDS) located in the Air Force
Records Management System.
This memorandum becomes void after one year has elapsed from the date of this memorandum,
or upon incorporation by an interim change to, or rewrite of AFI 36-2406, whichever is earlier.
The point of contact for this publication is AF/A1PPP, af.a1ppp.workf[email protected].mil.
GWENDOLYN R. DEFILIPPI
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary
(Manpower and Reserve Affairs)
Attachment:
Guidance Changes to AFI 36-2406
AFI36-2406_AFGM2024-01
(Replace) 1.2.4. AF Form 707, Officer Performance Report (OPR) (Lt thru Col); AF Form 715,
Officer Performance Brief; DAF Form 910, Enlisted Performance Report (AB/Spc1 thru TSgt);
AF Form 911, Enlisted Performance Report (MSgt thru SMSgt); AF Form 912, Enlisted
Performance Report (CMSgt); AF Form 716, Enlisted Performance Brief. Use to document
performance as well as provide information for making promotion recommendations and other
management decisions.
(Replace) 4.2. Enlisted Evaluation Forms. All enlisted members will use myEval to process
ALQ evaluations. See Table 4.14. The AF Form 716 will be used by exception only (see
paragraph 1.3.3.1).
4.2.1. DELETE
4.2.2. DELETE
4.2.3. DELETE
4.2.3.1. DELETE
4.2.3.2. DELETE
(Replace) Table 4.14. (RegAF and ARC only) Instructions for Preparing an Enlisted ALQ
Evaluation
ENLISTED PERFORMANCE BRIEF
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
1
Grade
Select appropriate grade. See
paragraph 1.4.9.
SrA, SSgt (S),
SSgt, TSgt (S),
TSgt, MSgt (S),
MSgt, SMSgt (S),
SMSgt, CMSgt
(S), CMSgt
2
Name
Enter Last Name, First Name,
Middle Initial, and any suffix
(e.g., JR., SR., III). If there is no
middle initial, the use of “NMI”
is optional. Name will be in all
upper case.
DOE,
MATTHEW A.
3
DoDID
Enter full DoDID number
1234567890
4
Duty Title
Enter the approved duty title
from MilPDS as of the SCOD or
in the event of a PCS or PCA, the
information as of the accounting
date.
If the duty title is abbreviated and
entries are not clear text, spell
them out. Consult with the
CSS/MPF for any corrective
actions. Ensure the duty title is
commensurate with the ratee’s
grade, AFSC, and responsibility.
Refer to the Enlisted Force
Structure for guidance pertinent
to duty titles.
(use format in example)
For personnel on a 365-day
extended deployment, use the
deployed duty title.
Admin NCOIC
5
DAFSC
Enter DAFSC held as of the
“THRU” date of the evaluation,
including prefix and suffix, if
applicable, or in the event of a
PCS or PCA, enter information
as of the accounting date. 365-
day extended deployments will
use the TDY DAFSC.
3F051
6
Reason
Select the reason for evaluation.
Annual, Biennial,
Directed by
Commander, or
Directed by HAF
7
Period
“FROM” Date: See paragraph
4.6.
“THRU” Date: 31 May of
current year. This is the SCOD
for the appropriate grade. See
paragraph 4.7 for variations.
SrA: 31 Mar 2023
– 30 Mar 2024
SSgt Select/SSgt:
31 Jan 2023 – Jan
30 2024
TSgt Select/TSgt:
30 Nov 2023 – 29
Nov 2024
MSgt
Select/MSgt: 30
Sep 2023 – 29
Sep 2024
SMSgt
Select/SMSgt: 31
Jul – 30 Jul 2024
CMSgt
Select/CMSgt: 31
May 2023 – 30
May 2024
8
Days Supervised
Enter the number of days of
supervision. See paragraph 4.8.
365
9
Days Non-Rated
Enter number of days Non-Rated
(if applicable) in accordance with
paragraph 1.4.11.
120
10
Organization and Command
Enter information as of close-out
date or in the event of a PCS or
PCA, the information as of the
accounting date. Nomenclature
does not necessarily duplicate
what is on the evaluation notice.
The goal is an accurate
description of where and to
whom the ratee belongs.
Command will be listed inside
parentheses. 365-day extended
deployments will use the home
station unit, “with duty at…”
AFR only: For IMAs, PIRR and
PIRR Category E, information
123d Fighter
Squadron (ACC)
will be that of unit of attachment.
See paragraph 1.4.7.
11
Location
Enter information as of close-out
date.
JB Langley-
Eustis, VA
12
Duty Description
Comments in narrative format
are mandatory.
Enter information about the
position the ratee held in the unit
and the nature or level of job
responsibilities. The rater
develops the information for this
section.
This description must reflect the
uniqueness of each ratee’s job.
Be specific—include level of
responsibility, number of people
supervised, dollar value of
resources accountable
for/projects managed, etc. Make
it clear; use plain English. Avoid
jargon and topical references—
they obscure rather than clarify
meaning. Only acronyms on the
approved acronym list are
authorized.
Previous jobs held during the
reporting period may be
mentioned only if it impacts the
evaluation.
365-day extended deployments
will use the TDY duty
description.
Supervises 2
Airmen. Authors
guidance on
performance
evaluations.
Prepares lesson
plans for ALS
curriculum.
RATER ASSESSMENT
13
Executing the Mission
Comments are mandatory; must
include at least one performance
statement. See paragraph
1.6.3.11.1. May use “THIS
SECTION NOT USED” as a
mandatory performance
statement.
See paragraph
1.3.3.2.
14
Leading People
Comments are mandatory; must
include at least one performance
See paragraph
1.3.3.2.
statement. See paragraph
1.6.3.11.2. May use “THIS
SECTION NOT USED” as a
mandatory performance
statement.
15
Managing Resources
Comments are mandatory; must
include at least one performance
statement. See paragraph
1.6.3.11.3. May use “THIS
SECTION NOT USED” as a
mandatory performance
statement.
See paragraph
1.3.3.2.
16
Improving the Unit
Comments are mandatory; must
include at least one performance
statement. See paragraph
1.6.3.11.4. May use “THIS
SECTION NOT USED” as a
mandatory performance
statement.
See paragraph
1.3.3.2.
17
Mandatory Comments
(Housing/Voting)
If ratee has oversight of military
privatized housing and or is a
voting assistance officer, enter
the appropriate statement(s).
Rater must also include a unique
performance statement(s). See
paragraphs 1.8.10, and 1.11.5.
If required, enter the applicable
statement(s) “The Ratee
exercised effective oversight of
military privatized housing.” Or
“The Ratee was not effective in
oversight of military privatized
housing.”
If required, enter a unique
performance statement on the
ratee’s performance as the voting
assistance officer.
See paragraph
1.3.3.2.
18
Rater Name, Grade, and Branch
of Service
Enter rater’s information as of
the close-out date. However, if
the ratee has a PCS, PCA, or
departs from a 365-day extended
deployment on or after the
accounting date, use the rater as
Sue J. Doe, Col,
USAF
Sally S. Mesaros,
SES, DAF
of the SCOD from the unit as of
the established accounting date.
See paragraph 5.2.1.3.
Multiple general officers serving
as general evaluators are
prohibited, see paragraph
1.7.1.7 for exceptions.
Jeremy R. Dice,
GS-15, DAF
19
Rater Duty Title
Enter rater’s information as of
the close-out date. However, if
the ratee has a PCS, PCA, or
departs from a 365-day extended
deployment on or after the
accounting date, use the rater as
of the SCOD from the unit as of
the established accounting date.
See paragraph 5.2.1.3.
Commander
20
Rater Organization and
Command
Enter rater’s information as of
the close-out date. However, if
the ratee has a PCS, PCA, or
departs from a 365-day extended
deployment on or after the
accounting date, use the rater as
of the SCOD from the unit as of
the established accounting date.
See paragraph 5.2.1.3.
366th Fighter
Squadron (ACC)
21
Rater Signature
The evaluations have digital
signature capability which
includes a date stamp. In the rare
instance where digital signatures
cannot be used, sign in
reproducible blue or black ink
and handwrite, stamp, or type the
date next to the signature (DD
MMM YY).
Do not sign blank forms that do
not contain comments and/or
ratings, sign before the close-out
date (only on or after), or date
before the date the rater signed it
or earlier than the date of the
ratee’s endorsement to a referral
letter.
See paragraph 1.4.12.
HIGHER LEVEL REVIEWER ASSESSMENT
22
CMSgt Only: Higher
Responsibility
Select the block that accurately
describes the ratee’s next level
of responsibility:
READY NOW - Select this
category when CMSgts are
ready to immediately assume
greater responsibility in a more
challenging position than
currently held.
ON-TRACK - Select this
category when CMSgts are
excelling in their current
position, demonstrating growth
potential, and are ready to
transition to a position in a
related specialty, or at a
different organizational level,
at the first available
opportunity.
CURRENT ASSIGNMENT –
Select this category when
MSgts should remain in their
current assignment for one or
some of the following reasons:
are not forecasted to be moved
in the near-term; have not been
evaluated as a CMSgt in their
current position; may have a
specific expertise required in-
place; be in pre-defined tour
lengths; or be in nominative
positions.
GROOM - Select this category
when CMSgts require
additional grooming in their
duty position or as a CMSgt
prior to being placed in a
position with greater
responsibilities. These
CMSgts may be ready for
Use drop down
function to select
level of
responsibility.
increased responsibilities in the
future.
DO NOT RETAIN – Select this
category when CMSgts are not
recommended for retention. Do
not retain recommendations
constitute a referral evaluation
and therefore require senior rater
comments in Section II, part 1.
Comments that exceed one line
will require the use of a DAF
Form 77.
22
SrA –TSgt Only: Promotion
Recommendation
This section is to be
completed only when the
member is eligible for a
promotion recommendation.
Promote (P):
Recommended for
promotion based on
performance at or above
established DAF standards
and expectations. Performs
with the majority of
personnel and at a level
commensurate with peers.
Must Promote (MP):
Recommended for
accelerated promotion based
on stellar performance well
above established DAF
standards and expectations.
Designated for outstanding
performers who perform at a
level higher than their peers.
RegAF personnel receiving
a “MP” receive a distinct
promotion advantage over
their peers.
Promote Now (PN):
Recommended for
immediate promotion based
on exemplary performance
that far exceeds established
DAF standards and
expectations. Reserved for
elite performers who
perform well above other
personnel in their peer
group. RegAF personnel
receiving a “PN” receive a
significant promotion
advantage over their peers.
Not Ready Now (NRN):
Not considered ready for
promotion at this time based
on the need for additional
grooming in the current
grade, or when personnel
may require specific
attention with regard to
performance of established
DAF standards and
expectations. NRN
evaluations do not
necessarily constitute a
referral, provided the report
contains no negative
comments.
23
MSgt – SMSgt only:
Stratification
(RegAF and AFR only) Senior
rater HLRs may stratify up to
25% of SNCOs. The top 20% of
SMSgts and top 10% of MSgts
will receive a numerator and
denominator stratification (#x of
x). An additional 5% of SMSgts
and 15% of MSgts will receive a
stratification statement of “Top
25% of (respective grade). For
units with less than the required
TIG/TIS eligible members to
start normal rounding rules, a
stratification/endorsement
statement either in a numerator
and denominator format or
percentage format (e.g., “Top
25%”) is authorized; the use of
both combined is not authorized.
If no stratification is used, enter
the statement, “THIS SECTION
NOT USED.”
See paragraph 4.11.2.1.
24
Rater Assessment
Concur/non-concur with the
rater’s assessment by making the
appropriate selection.
25
Future Roles
(CMSgt Only) If the senior
rater marks either “Ready
Now, On-Track, Current
Assignment, or Groom” then
select the block that accurately
describes the ideal future roles
(no more than two roles; first
recommendation or “primary
vector” has highest
precedence).
Note: Senior raters may not
recommend future roles for
those ratees considered “Do
Not Retain” for higher
responsibility.
Note: Senior raters will
stratify all CMSgts receiving a
primary vector for the current
year’s Command Chief
Screening Board. (T-1)
CMSgts being nominated will
be stratified against all CMSgts
under the senior rater’s
purview, not just those CMSgts
eligible for or nominated for
CCM duty. (T-1) CMSgt
selects may not to be included
in the total number of CMSgts
under the senior rater’s
purview.
Use drop down
functions to select
future roles.
Stratification is prohibited for
those CMSgts not receiving
nomination for the current
year’s Command Chief
Screening Board. CCM
nominations must be
accompanied by a “Ready
Now” recommendation.
CMSgts not receiving a
“Ready Now” recommendation
for higher responsibility are not
eligible for a primary vector
CCM duty nomination.
(RegAF Only) CMSgt ratees may
only be nominated for CCM duty
provided they meet the minimum
CCM TIG requirements
established by AF/A1LE for the
applicable year’s Command
Chief Screening Board.
26
Comment(s)
Comments are mandatory; must
include at least one performance
statement. See paragraph
1.6.3.11.1. May use “THIS
SECTION NOT USED” as a
mandatory performance
statement.
See paragraph
1.3.3.2.
27
Higher Level Reviewer Name,
Grade, and Branch of Service
Enter the HLR’s information.
The HLR is position-based.
HLRs assigned on or prior to the
close-out date, enter information
as of the close-out date; HLRs
assigned after the close-out date,
enter the information as of the
date signed.
Multiple general officers serving
as evaluators are prohibited; see
paragraph 1.7.1.7 for
exceptions. (T-1)
Sue J. Doe, Col,
USAF
Sally S. Mesaros,
SES, DAF
Jeremy R. Dice,
GS-15, DAF
Jacob M. Freer,
Col, KSANG
28
Higher Level Reviewer Duty
Title
Commander
29
Higher Level Reviewer
Organization and Command
123d Operations
Group (ACC)
30
Higher Level Reviewer Signature
The evaluations have digital
signature capability which
includes a date stamp. In the rare
instance where digital signatures
cannot be used, sign in
reproducible blue or black ink
and handwrite, stamp, or type the
date next to the signature (DD
MMM YY).
Do not sign blank forms that do
not contain comments and/or
ratings, sign before the close-out
date (only on or after), or date
before the date the rater signed it
or earlier than the date of the
ratee’s endorsement to a referral
letter.
See paragraph 1.4.12.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
31
Comment(s)
Complete only if criteria are met
for additional comments.
If not needed, state, “THIS
SECTION NOT USED”
32
Evaluator Name, Grade, and
Branch of Service
Enter evaluator’s information as
of the SCOD.
33
Role
Enter evaluator’s role.
Air Force
Advisor,
Functional
Examiner
34
Evaluator Duty Title
Enter evaluators duty title as of
the SCOD.
Financial
Manager
35
Evaluator Organization and
Command
Enter evaluator’s information as
of the SCOD.
36
Evaluator Signature
The evaluations have digital
signature capability which
includes a date stamp. In the rare
instance where digital signatures
cannot be used, sign in
reproducible blue or black ink
and handwrite, stamp, or type the
date next to the signature (DD
MMM YY).
Do not sign blank forms that do
not contain comments and/or
ratings, sign before the close-out
date (only on or after), or date
before the date the rater signed it
or earlier than the date of the
ratee’s endorsement to a referral
letter.
REFERRAL REPORT
37
Referral Report Comments
Complete this section for referral
evaluations only. See
paragraph 1.10
38
Referring Evaluator Name,
Grade, and Branch of Service
Enter the referring evaluator’s
information as of the SCOD.
39
Referring Evaluator Duty Title
Enter the referring evaluator’s
information as of the SCOD.
40
Referring Evaluator Signature
The evaluations have digital
signature capability which
includes a date stamp. In the rare
instance where digital signatures
cannot be used, sign in
reproducible blue or black ink
and handwrite, stamp, or type the
date next to the signature (DD
MMM YY).
Do not sign blank forms that do
not contain comments and/or
ratings, sign before the close-out
date (only on or after), or date
before the date the rater signed it
or earlier than the date of the
ratee’s endorsement to a referral
letter.
41
Date
Date will auto populate when
report is signed.
27 Mar 2023
42
Ratee Acknowledgement
The ratee must acknowledge
receipt prior to the evaluation
becoming a matter of record by
signing in this block. Signing the
evaluation does not imply
concurrence, but
acknowledgement and review of
personal information on the
Digital or wet
signatures. A
combination of
both is
authorized.
evaluation. If the ratee non-
concurs with the evaluation, they
may submit an appeal in
accordance with Chapter 10.
The rater will suspense the ratee
three duty days (30 calendar days
for AFR) to sign the evaluation.
Non-digital: Handwrite, date
stamp or type the date. Sign on
or after the close-out date.
43
Signature of Ratee
The evaluations have digital
signature capability which
includes a date stamp. In the rare
instance where digital signatures
cannot be used, sign in
reproducible blue or black ink
and handwrite, stamp, or type the
date next to the signature (DD
MMM YY).
Do not sign blank forms that do
not contain comments and/or
ratings, sign before the close-out
date (only on or after), or date
before the date the rater signed it
or earlier than the date of the
ratee’s endorsement to a referral
letter.
44
Date
Date will auto populate when
report is signed.
27 Mar 2023
Note: There are minor formatting differences between the PDF version of the Enlisted
Performance Brief (AF Form 716) and the system generated version completed in myEval.
Chapter 11 (Delete)
Prescribed Forms
(Replace) AF Form 716, Enlisted Performance Brief
BY ORDER OF THE
SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
INSTRUCTION 36-2406
4 AUGUST 2023
Personnel
OFFICER AND ENLISTED
EVALUATIONS SYSTEMS
COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PUBLICATION IS MANDATORY
ACCESSIBILITY: Publications and forms are available on the e-Publishing website at
www.e-Publishing.af.mil for downloading or ordering.
RELEASABILITY: There are no releasability restrictions on this publication.
OPR: AFPC Certified by: SAF/MR
Supersedes: DAFI36-2406, 16 March 2022 Pages: 354
This publication implements Department of the Air Force Policy Directive (DAFPD) 36-24,
Military Evaluations. It provides guidance and procedures for implementing the United States Air
Force (USAF) and United States Space Force (USSF) Officer and Enlisted Evaluations Systems.
It also describes how to prepare, submit, and manage forms. This instruction has been developed
in collaboration between the Deputy Chief of Staff for Manpower, Personnel, and Services
(AF/A1); Chief of the Air Force Reserve (AF/RE); Deputy Chief of Space Operations for Human
Capital (SF/S1); and the Director of the Air National Guard (NGB/CF). This publication applies
to the Regular Air Force (RegAF), United States Space Force, Air Force Reserve, and the Air
National Guard. This instruction requires the collection and or maintenance of information
protected by the Privacy Act of 1974 authorized by Department of Defense Directive (DoDD)
5400.11, DoD Privacy Program. The applicable System of Records Notices (SORN) F036 AF PC
A, Effectiveness/Performance Reporting Systems and F036 AFPC T, Officer Performance Report
(OPR)/Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) Appeal Case Files are available at
http://dpcld.defense.gov/Privacy/SORNs/. Ensure all records generated as a result of processes
prescribed in this publication adhere to Air Force Instruction (AFI) 33-322, Records Management
and Information Governance Program, and are disposed in accordance with the Air Force Records
Disposition Schedule, which is located in the Air Force Records Information Management System.
Refer recommended changes and questions about this publication to the office of primary
responsibility using the Department of the Air Force (DAF) Form 847, Recommendation for
Change of Publication; route DAF Forms 847 from the field through Headquarters (HQ) Air Force
Personnel Center Promotions, Evaluations and Recognitions Policy Branch (AFPC/DP3SP), 550
2 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
publish supplements that change basic policies and procedures or merely duplicate the text of these
instructions. Supplements initiated at major command (MAJCOM) or field command
(FLDCOM)-level or below require Military Force Policy Division (AF/A1PP), Headquarters
Space Force, Force Management (SF/S1PP) and HQ AFPC/DP3SP approval before publication.
Send published copies of approved supplements to AF/A1PP, SF/S1PP, HQ AFPC/DP3SP, and
Headquarters Air Reserve Personnel Center Promotion Board Secretariat (HQ ARPC/PB). Field
agencies must get AFPC/DP3SP and Promotions, Evaluations and Recognition Policy Branch
(AF/A1PPP), and SF/S1PP approval before using a locally created version of the DAF and Air
Force (AF) Forms prescribed by this instruction. The authorities to waive wing, unit, delta, or
base delta level requirements in this publication are identified with a Tier (“T-0, T-1, T-2, T-3”)
number following the compliance statement. See Department of the Air Force Manual 90-161,
Publishing Processes and Procedures, for a description of the authorities associated with the tier
numbers. Submit requests for waivers through the chain of command to the appropriate Tier
waiver approval authority; for non-tiered items AFPC/DP3SP is the approval authority.
Compliance with the attachments in this publication is mandatory.
SUMMARY OF CHANGES
This rewrite fully implements previously approved guidance from Department of the Air Force
Guidance Memorandum (DAFGM) 2023-01, by (1) updating language to be inclusive of the
USSF, adding Chapter 11, Space Force Promotion Recommendation Process for Officer
Promotion Boards; (2) updating rating chain requirements for health professionals; (3) adding
guidance on Airman Leadership Qualities (ALQ) based performance reports for Regular Air Force
(RegAF) and Air Reserve Component (ARC) members; (4) implementing mandatory performance
statements for housing oversight; (5) authorizing Commandants of the Senior Noncommissioned
Officer Academy (SNCOA) and Noncommissioned Officer Academy (NCOA) to serve as final
evaluators; (6) updating guidance on stratifications in officer performance evaluations; (7)
codifying guidance to include detachment commanders on g-series orders requiring a formal LOE
and updating the DAF Form 77 to include “Det CC” in the drop-down menu as well as publishing
it as a DAF form; (8) prescribing AF Form 715, Officer Performance Brief for RegAF and ARC
officers only, and (9) updating instructions on completing the DAF Form 709, Promotion
Recommendation for RegAF and ARC members. This rewrite also prescribes AF Form 716,
Enlisted Performance Brief (CMSgt). Throughout this instruction the AF Form 715 and AF Form
716 will be referred to as the ALQ evaluation.
Chapter 1—GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS 9
1.1. Purpose..................................................................................................................... 9
1.2. Forms - Purpose and Utilization. ............................................................................. 9
1.3. General Guidelines. ................................................................................................. 10
1.4. Preparing and Processing Evaluations. .................................................................... 11
1.5. Evaluator Requirements. .......................................................................................... 19
1.6. Roles and Responsibilities. ...................................................................................... 22
1.7. Rating Chain Deviations and Evaluator Changes. ................................................... 30
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 3
1.8. Evaluator’s Mandatory Considerations. ................................................................... 34
1.9. Disagreements. ......................................................................................................... 37
1.10. Referral Evaluations. ............................................................................................... 38
1.11. Mandatory Comments. ............................................................................................. 45
1.12. General Prohibited Evaluator Considerations and Comments. ................................ 46
1.13. Policy Deviations and Waiver Requests. ................................................................. 50
1.14. Missing, Late and Removed Performance Evaluations. .......................................... 50
1.15. Wartime or National Emergency Provisions. .......................................................... 51
Figure 1.1. Example Referral Memorandum. ............................................................................. 52
Figure 1.2. Example Referral Memorandum (Continued). ........................................................ 53
Table 1.1. Mailing Addresses for Correspondence. .................................................................. 54
Table 1.2. Missing and Late Evaluations (See Notes 1 and 2). ................................................ 57
Chapter 2—PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK PROCESS 59
2.1. Purpose..................................................................................................................... 59
2.2. Responsibilities. ....................................................................................................... 59
2.3. Who Requires a Performance Feedback Assessment. ............................................. 60
2.4. Guidance for Conducting Performance Feedback Sessions. ................................... 60
2.5. When to Conduct Documented Performance Feedback Sessions............................ 60
2.6. The Performance Feedback Assessment Notice. ..................................................... 61
2.7. Performance Feedback Assessment Forms. ............................................................. 61
2.8. Preparing the Performance Feedback Assessment. .................................................. 62
2.9. Disposition and Access. ........................................................................................... 62
2.10. Failure to Conduct or Document a Performance Feedback Assessment. ................ 63
2.11. Tracking Performance Feedback Assessments. ....................................................... 63
Table 2.1. Performance Feedback Assessment Requirements. ................................................. 63
Table 2.2. Preparing AF Form 931, Airman Comprehensive Assessment (AB thru TSgt). ..... 65
Table 2.3. Preparing AF Form 932 (MSgt - CMSgt) Airman Comprehensive Assessment. .... 69
Table 2.4. Preparing AF Form 724 (Lt thru Col) Airman Comprehensive Assessment. .......... 73
Table 2.5. Preparing AF Form 724-A, Airman Comprehensive Assessment Addendum. ....... 76
Chapter 3—OFFICER PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS/OFFICER ALQ
EVALUATIONS 77
3.1. General Guidelines. ................................................................................................. 77
3.2. Purpose..................................................................................................................... 77
4 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
3.3. Who Requires an Officer Evaluation/Officer Performance Brief. ........................... 77
3.4. Who is Not Authorized, Unless Stated Below, an Officer Evaluation/ALQ
Evaluation ................................................................................................................ 78
3.5. When to Submit an Officer Evaluation/Officer Performance Brief......................... 79
3.6. Annual Reports ........................................................................................................ 80
3.7. Change of Reporting Official Reports (including emergencies or no-notice
departures). .............................................................................................................. 80
3.8. Directed by HAF, HSF, NGB, or Commander (MAJCOM, FLDCOM, wing,
delta, group, or squadron, as appropriate). ............................................................... 80
3.9. 365-day Extended Deployment Officer Evaluations/Officer Performance Briefs... 81
3.10. “FROM” Dates. ....................................................................................................... 86
3.11. “THRU” Dates. ........................................................................................................ 87
3.12. Number of Days of Supervision. ............................................................................. 87
3.13. Performance Feedback Assessment. ........................................................................ 88
3.14. Reviewer/Higher Level Reviewer. ........................................................................... 88
3.15. Stratifications. .......................................................................................................... 89
3.16. Unauthorized Evaluator Considerations and Comments. ........................................ 94
3.17. Extensions of Close-out Dates. ................................................................................ 97
Table 3.1. Instructions for Preparing AF Form 707, Officer Performance Report. .................. 98
Table 3.2. When to Prepare Officer Evaluations for RegAF and ARC Officers (Lieutenant
thru Colonel). ........................................................................................................... 110
Table 3.3. When to Prepare Officer Evaluations for USSF Officers (Lieutenant thru
Colonel). .................................................................................................................. 111
Table 3.4. Static Close-out Date Chart for RegAF, ARC and Statutory Tour Members. ......... 113
Table 3.5. Accounting Dates for Static Close-out Date Evaluations. ....................................... 113
Table 3.6. Instructions for Preparing an Officer Performance Brief (RegAF and ARC only). 114
Table 3.7. Summary of Authorized Stratification Peer Groups. ............................................... 127
Chapter 4—ENLISTED EVALUATIONS 130
4.1. General Guidelines. ................................................................................................. 130
4.2. Enlisted Evaluation Forms. ...................................................................................... 130
4.3. When to Accomplish an Enlisted Evaluation. ......................................................... 130
4.4. Evaluations not Authorized...................................................................................... 131
4.5. When to Submit an Enlisted Evaluation. ................................................................. 132
4.6. “FROM” Dates. ....................................................................................................... 132
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 5
4.7. “THRU” Dates. ........................................................................................................ 132
4.8. Number of Days of Supervision. ............................................................................. 135
4.9. Completing Evaluations. .......................................................................................... 135
4.10. Promotion Time-In-Grade (TIG)/Time-In-Service (TIS) eligibility (DAF Form
910 only). ................................................................................................................. 135
4.11. Time-In-Grade (TIG)/Senior Rater Stratification/Endorsement Eligibility (AF
Form 911 only). ....................................................................................................... 136
4.12. Final Evaluator’s Position and Single Evaluators. ................................................... 138
4.13. Performance Feedback Assessment. ........................................................................ 140
4.14. Forced Distributor, (Section IX, DAF Form 910) Unit Commander/Military or
Civilian Director/Other Authorized Reviewer, (Section VIII, AF Form 911). ........ 140
4.15. Evaluator Considerations and Comments. ............................................................... 141
4.16. Inappropriate Comments Referring to Separation/Retirement, Civilian
Employment, and Professional Military Education. ................................................ 142
4.17. Ratee’s Acknowledgement. ..................................................................................... 142
4.18. Forced Distribution (DAF Form 910 only). ............................................................. 143
Table 4.1. Enlisted Forced Distribution Panel Scale. ............................................................... 152
Table 4.2. When to Submit Enlisted Evaluations for RegAF, USSF, Active Guard Reserve,
and Stat Tour. ........................................................................................................... 152
Table 4.3. When to submit Enlisted Evaluations for ARC Non-AGR. ..................................... 155
Table 4.4. Static Close-out Date Chart for RegAF, USSF, Active Guard Reserve, and Stat
Tour. ......................................................................................................................... 156
Table 4.5. Static Close-out Date Chart for ARC Non-AGR. .................................................... 156
Table 4.6. Accounting Dates for Static Close-out Date Evaluations. ....................................... 157
Table 4.7. Forced Distribution Allocation Table (SrA/Spc4). .................................................. 158
Table 4.8. Forced Distribution Allocation Table (SSgt/Sgt and TSgt). .................................... 160
Table 4.9. Instructions for DAF Form 910, Enlisted Performance Report (AB/Spc1-TSgt). ... 161
Table 4.10. Instructions for AF Form 911, Enlisted Performance Report (MSgt-SMSgt). ........ 173
Table 4.11. Time-in-Grade (TIG) Senior Rater Eligibility Chart. .............................................. 186
Table 4.12. Instructions for AF Form 912, Enlisted Performance Reports (CMSgt). ................ 188
Table 4.13. The United States Air Force Band (3N2X1) and The United States Air Force
Academy Band (3N3X1) Direct Reporting from Basic Military Training and
Promotion to TSgt. ................................................................................................... 199
Table 4.14. Instructions for Preparing an Enlisted ALQ Evaluation – CMSgt (RegAF and
ARC only). ............................................................................................................... 200
6 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Chapter 5—DAF FORM 77, LETTER OF EVALUATION 211
5.1. Purpose..................................................................................................................... 211
5.2. Types of LOEs. ........................................................................................................ 211
5.3. Who Can Prepare. .................................................................................................... 213
5.4. Administrative Practices. ......................................................................................... 214
5.5. Completing DAF Form 77, Letter of Evaluation. .................................................... 214
5.6. Routing, Updating and Disposition Responsibilities. .............................................. 214
5.7. MPF, CSS/HR Specialist, and PERSCO Team Responsibilities. ............................ 215
Table 5.1. Instructions for Completing the DAF Form 77, Letter of Evaluation. See Note 5. . 217
Table 5.2. When to submit a Letter of Evaluation. ................................................................... 224
Chapter 6—AF FORM 475, EDUCATION/TRAINING REPORT 226
6.1. When to Use Training Reports (TR). ....................................................................... 226
6.2. Who Prepares Training Reports. .............................................................................. 228
6.3. Referral Training Reports. ....................................................................................... 228
6.4. Routing and Responsibilities. .................................................................................. 228
Table 6.1. Instructions for Completing AF Form 475, Training Report (Officers Only). ........ 229
Table 6.2. When to Prepare AF Form 475, Training Report (T-1). .......................................... 233
Chapter 7—GENERAL OFFICER EVALUATIONS 237
7.1. Overview. ................................................................................................................. 237
7.2. Forms Used. ............................................................................................................. 237
7.3. Reasons for Reports. ................................................................................................ 237
7.4. General Instructions. ................................................................................................ 237
7.5. Processing General Officer Evaluations. ................................................................. 239
Table 7.1. Instructions for Completing DAF Form 78, Department of the Air Force General
Officer Promotion Recommendation. ...................................................................... 240
Table 7.2. Instructions for DAF Form 77 for General Officers. ............................................... 243
Chapter 8—(REGAF AND ARC ONLY) PROMOTION RECOMMENDATION AND
MANAGEMENT LEVEL REVIEW (MLR) PROCESS 246
8.1. AF Form 709 (for ADL officers). ............................................................................ 246
8.2. AF Form 709 for RASL Officers. ............................................................................ 256
8.3. Management Level Reviews (ADL Lieutenant Colonel and Below). ..................... 260
8.4. Special Provisions (applies to ADL officers only). ................................................. 273
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 7
8.5. Correction of Promotion Recommendation Forms (PRF) (ADL Officers) (“Stop
File” process). .......................................................................................................... 277
8.6. Promotion Recommendations for Colonels. ............................................................ 278
8.7. Supplemental Management Level Reviews for Recommendation Upgrade Post-
Central Selection Board, (For ADL Only). .............................................................. 280
Figure 8.1. Officer's Right to Submit a Memorandum to the Central Selection Board or
ResAF Central Selection Board (See DAFI 36-2501, Officer Promotions and
Selective Continuation, for further guidance). ......................................................... 281
Table 8.1. Instructions for Completing AF Form 709, Promotion Recommendation (for
officers in the grade of lieutenant colonel and below). ............................................ 282
Table 8.2. What to Enter in (Group Size) on the PRF (ADL Lt Col and below only). ............. 286
Table 8.3. Senior Rater “Definitely Promote” Allocation Rate Table – Active Duty List
Officers. ................................................................................................................... 287
Table 8.4. Instructions for Completing AF Form 709, Promotion Recommendation Form
(for officers in the grade of colonel). ....................................................................... 289
Chapter 9—AF FORM 3538, RETENTION RECOMMENDATION FORM 294
9.1. When to Use the AF Form 3538, Retention Recommendation Form (RRF). .......... 294
9.2. Responsibilities. ....................................................................................................... 294
9.3. Retention Recommendation Form Submission........................................................ 295
9.4. Air Force or Space Force Advisor Examination. ..................................................... 295
9.5. Correction of a Retention Recommendation Form. ................................................. 295
Figure 9.1. Officer's Right to Submit a Memorandum to the Central Selection Board (central
selection board). ....................................................................................................... 296
Table 9.1. Instructions for Completing AF Form 3538, Retention Recommendation Form. ... 297
Chapter 10—CORRECTING OFFICER AND ENLISTED EVALUATIONS 300
10.1. Purpose..................................................................................................................... 300
10.2. Program Elements. ................................................................................................... 300
10.3. Correcting Evaluations. ........................................................................................... 303
10.4. Responsibilities. ....................................................................................................... 304
10.5. Meeting Time Limits and Expedited Requests. ....................................................... 307
10.6. Using Classified, Privacy Act, and Restricted Release Information: ....................... 307
10.7. Requesting Special Selection Board (SSB) or Supplemental Promotion
Consideration: .......................................................................................................... 308
10.8. Resubmitting an Appeal: ......................................................................................... 308
Table 10.1. How to Submit Requests for Correction. ................................................................. 309
8 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Table 10.2. Correcting Minor Errors on Evaluations. ................................................................. 310
Table 10.3. Minor Corrections – Offices Authorized to Make Corrections and Disposition. .... 312
Table 10.4. Board Directed Corrections - Correcting and Disposition of Documents. .............. 314
Table 10.5. Correcting DAF Form 709, Promotion Recommendation Forms. ........................... 316
Table 10.6. Instructions For AF Form 948, Application for Correction/Removal of
Evaluation Reports (See paragraph 10.4.4 before completing). .............................. 317
Figure 10.1. Sample, AF Form 948, Application for Correction/Removal of Evaluation
Reports. .................................................................................................................... 319
Chapter 11—(USSF ONLY) SPACE FORCE PROMOTION RECOMMENDATION
PROCESS FOR OFFICER PROMOTION BOARDS 320
11.1. DAF Form 709. ........................................................................................................ 320
11.2. Promotion Recommendation Process Milestones. ................................................... 324
11.3. Special Provisions. ................................................................................................... 324
11.4. Correction of Promotion Recommendation Forms (PRF) (Stop File process). ....... 326
Figure 11.1. Officer's Right to Submit a Memorandum to the Central Selection Board (See
DAFI 36-2501, Officer Promotions and Selective Continuation, for further
guidance). ................................................................................................................. 327
Table 11.1. Instructions for Completing DAF Form 709, Promotion Recommendation Form
(for officers in the grade of lieutenant colonel and below). ..................................... 328
Attachment 1—GLOSSARY OF REFERENCES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION 330
Attachment 2—APPEAL GUIDANCE FOR APPLICANTS 347
Attachment 3—NON-RATED PERIOD MEMORANDUM 354
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 9
Chapter 1
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
1.1. Purpose. The Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Systems have varied purposes. The first is to
effectively communicate performance standards and expectations and provide meaningful
feedback on how those standards and expectations are being upheld. The second is to establish a
reliable, long-term, cumulative record of performance and promotion potential based on that
performance. The third is to provide sound information to assist in making talent management
decisions.
1.1.1. To accomplish these purposes, the evaluation system focuses on performance. How
well a member does their job and the qualities the individual brings to their organization are
of paramount importance to the Department of the Air Force (DAF). It is also important for
development of skills and leadership abilities and in determining who will be selected for
advancement through assignments, promotions, and other personnel actions. The evaluation
system emphasizes the importance of performance in several ways, to include the use of
Airman Leadership Qualities (ALQs) (Air Force only), using periodic performance feedback
as the basis for formal evaluations, and through performance-based promotion
recommendations.
1.1.2. Unless stated otherwise, the general guidelines outlined in this chapter apply to all
officer and enlisted evaluations, training reports (TR), promotion recommendation forms
(PRF), letters of evaluation (LOE), enlisted retention recommendation forms (ERRF), and
retention recommendation forms (RRF).
1.2. Forms - Purpose and Utilization.
1.2.1. DAF Form 77, Letter of Evaluation (LOE), is a multipurpose evaluation form.
1.2.2. DAF Form 78, Department of the Air Force General Officer Promotion
Recommendation (GO PRF). Use to document performance and promotion recommendations
for general officers.
1.2.3. AF Form 475, Education/Training Report (TR). Use to document performance during
education or formal training.
1.2.4. AF Form 707, Officer Performance Report (OPR) (Lt thru Col); AF Form 715, Officer
Performance Brief, DAF Form 910, Enlisted Performance Report (AB/Spc1 thru TSgt); AF
Form 911, Enlisted Performance Report (MSgt thru SMSgt), AF Form 912, Enlisted
Performance Report (CMSgt), AF Form 716, Enlisted Performance Brief-CMSgt. Use to
document performance as well as provide information for making promotion recommendations
and other management decisions.
1.2.5. DAF Form 709, Promotion Recommendation. Use to assess an officer’s performance-
based potential and to recommend promotion to Central Selection Boards.
1.2.6. AF Form 724, Airman Comprehensive Assessment Worksheet (2Lt thru Col), AF Form
724-A, Airman Comprehensive Assessment Addendum, AF Form 931, Airman Comprehensive
Assessment Worksheet (AB/Spc1 thru TSgt), and AF Form 932, Airman Comprehensive
Assessment Worksheet (MSgt thru CMSgt). Use to document formal feedback.
10 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
1.2.7. AF Form 948, Application for Correction/Removal of Evaluation Reports. Use to
substitute, correct or remove an evaluation when an applicant does not have access to the
Virtual Military Personnel Flight (vMPF).
1.3. General Guidelines.
1.3.1. Access. Evaluations are “Controlled Unclassified Information” forms and must be
marked, protected, and accessed accordingly. The office with custodial responsibility is
responsible for determining if a requestor’s official duties require access. See Chapter 2 for
access to the performance feedback assessment worksheets.
1.3.2. Classified Information and Security Classification. Do not enter classified information
in any section of the evaluation; this includes attachments to evaluations, referral documents,
and endorsements to referral documents. If an entry would result in the release of classified
information, use the word "Data Masked" in place of that entry. In cases where the evaluator
is assigned to a classified organization or location, enter "Data Masked" for organization
nomenclature and nothing more.
1.3.3. Format.
1.3.3.1. (RegAF and ARC only) All evaluations will be completed in myEval. The AF
Form 715 and AF Form 716 will be used by exception only. Send exception to policy
(ETP) requests through the wing commander or the comparative level to AFPC/DP3SP for
RegAF and to ARPC/DPTS for ARC with final approval from HAF/A1PP. See
paragraph 1.13.4 who, in turn, will forward the request to the appropriate office of
primary responsibility listed in Table 1.1.
1.3.3.2. (RegAF and ARC only) Include at least one performance statement in each
section of the evaluation being accomplished. (T-1) “THIS SECTION NOT USED,” may
be used as a performance statement. White space is authorized. A performance statement
is a standalone sentence that must include two elements: 1) the behavior or action taken
by an Airman; and 2) the impact, results, or outcome of that behavior or action.
1.3.3.3. (USSF only) Use bullet format as specified in the appropriate table for the
evaluation being accomplished. Limit bullets to a maximum of two lines per bullet and
white space is authorized. Main bullets shall begin at the left margin with one space after
the “-”.
1.3.4. Special Formatting. Do not underline, capitalize, or use bold print, unusual fonts or
characters, multiple exclamation marks, or headings to emphasize comments, except as
required to identify proper names or publication titles.
1.3.5. Handwritten Evaluations. Handwrite evaluations when no other means are available
and authorized by Headquarters (HQ) AFPC Promotions, Evaluations and Recognitions Policy
Branch (AFPC/DP3SP) or HQ Air Reserve Personnel Center (ARPC) Sustainment Division
(ARPC/DPTS). The President and Vice President of the United States may handwrite
evaluations.
1.3.6. Nicknames and Acronyms.
1.3.6.1. Nicknames that are a form of the ratee’s name, to include middle names, are
permitted (e.g., Bill/Will for William, Jim for James, Chris for Christopher/Christine). Call
signs and code names are not authorized.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 11
1.3.6.2. (USSF only) Common acronyms and abbreviations such as CGO, NCO,
CONUS, TDY, org, and wg are not required to be spelled out. Uncommon acronyms are
not required to be spelled out in the evaluators comment sections; they must be spelled out
in the “Remarks” section. Creating a continuation sheet solely to record acronyms is not
authorized.
1.3.6.3. (RegAF and ARC only) Limit the use of acronyms and abbreviations. When
used, only acronyms and abbreviations on the AF Acronym and Abbreviation List located
at https://www.afpc.af.mil/Career-Management/Acronyms/ are authorized, unless
noted by an approved category. (T-1)
1.3.7. Waivers and Deviations. Send requests for deviations or waivers through the wing/delta
commander or the comparative level to their MAJCOM/FLDCOM. The requests will then be
sent to AFPC/DP3SP for RegAF and USSF and to ARPC/DPTS for ARC who, in turn, will
forward the request to the appropriate office of primary responsibility listed in Table 1.1.
Approved Tier 2, 3 and non-tiered waivers are forwarded to HQ Air Force, Directorate of Force
Management Policy (AF/A1P), HQ AFPC/DP3SP, ARPC/DPTS, and/or HQ Space Force,
Directorate of Military Policy and Programs (SF/S1P) in accordance with DAFI 90-160.
1.3.7.1. Waiver Process. Waivers are processed in accordance with DAFI 90-160 except
as noted below.
1.3.7.1.1. Tier 0 waiver: The appropriate MAJCOM/A1 or FLDCOM/S1 submits the
package to AFPC/DP3SP. AFPC/DP3SP submits the package to AF/A1P or SF/S1P
for submission to the appropriate external agency/non-Air Force or non-Space Force
authority for approval. Package results will be provided to AFPC/DP3SP and then
forwarded to the appropriate MAJCOM/A1 or FLDCOM/S1.
1.3.7.1.2. Tier 1 waiver: The appropriate MAJCOM/A1 or FLDCOM/S1 submits the
package to AFPC/DP3SP or ARPC/DPTS for the ARC as appropriate. AFPC/DP3SP
processes/submits the package to AF/A1P, SF/S1P, AF/A1, or SF/S1 for final approval.
Package results will be provided to the appropriate MAJCOM/A1 or FLDCOM/S1.
1.3.7.2. Waivers and the Managers Internal Control Toolset. The requesting
commander/director will ensure appropriate waiver information is entered in the
Management Internal Control Toolset within 7 calendar days of waiver approval
notification.
1.4. Preparing and Processing Evaluations.
1.4.1. Career Briefs. Evaluators are permitted to review a member’s career brief when writing
an evaluation. For officers, the brief will be used to aid in making recommendations for
command, assignments, and developmental education. For enlisted, the brief may be used as
an aid in determining senior noncommissioned officer (SNCO) stratification/endorsement
level eligibility or junior enlisted forced distribution promotion recommendation. Note: The
ANG does not stratify enlisted members; therefore, stratifications are not applicable to ANG
enlisted members
1.4.2. Suspenses.
1.4.2.1. The commander’s support staff (CSS) and servicing military personnel flight
(MPF) work together to manage the evaluation system and monitor suspenses. Established
12 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
suspenses should allow for the evaluation to be filed in the member’s official record no
later than 60 calendar days after the close-out date. Evaluations will not be signed prior to
the close-out date. (T-1) Note: This does not preclude a draft copy being routed earlier.
1.4.2.2. Officer and Enlisted Evaluations.
1.4.2.2.1. Due to the MPF no later than 30 calendar days after close-out. (T-1)
1.4.2.2.2. Due to Air Reserve Personnel Center (ARPC) (when required [e.g.,
referrals]) or office of record no later than 45 calendar days after close-out. (T-1) This
suspense is to allow for any corrections that may be needed at the lower level.
1.4.2.2.3. Filed in the Automated Records Management System (ARMS) and
Personnel Records Display Application (PRDA) no later than 60 calendar days after
the close-out. (T-1)
1.4.2.3. Evaluations directed by Headquarters United States Air Force or Headquarters
United States Space Force (DBH), or the National Guard Bureau (NGB) are due to the
respective office by the suspense date established in the directing letter or message. (T-1)
1.4.2.4. Complete referral evaluations in accordance with paragraph 1.10 and file into
ARMS and PRDA no later than 60 calendar days for RegAF, USSF, and Active Guard
Reserve (AGR) personnel and 90 calendar days for non-extended active duty (EAD)
personnel, after the close-out date of the evaluation.
1.4.3. When an Evaluation Becomes a Matter of Record.
1.4.3.1. An evaluation is considered complete when all applicable signature elements are
signed or completed. Completed evaluations become a matter of record once they are
uploaded into ARMS and PRDA. Evaluations are considered “working copies” until they
are made a matter of record. (T-1)
1.4.3.2. Correction requests made after an evaluation becomes a matter of record must be
submitted through the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB) in accordance with
Chapter 10. (T-1)
1.4.4. Attachments to Evaluations. Attachments are considered to be part of the evaluation.
Acceptable attachments are referral memorandums, rebuttals to referrals (which could include
DAF Form 77s that are not part of the official record), endorsement memorandums.
1.4.5. Copying and Printing Evaluations.
1.4.5.1. Printing. Do not alter the form, (e.g., reduce or enlarge), other than for authorized
administrative corrections, (e.g., white out on a date change for “wet” signed evaluations).
(T-1) Both sides of the form will be printed whether used or not. (T-1)
1.4.5.1.1. Do not reproduce copies for purposes other than those noted below without
the approval of AFPC/DP3SP or ARPC/DPTSC:
1.4.5.1.1.1. For official actions such as courts-martial, awards and decoration
recommendations, promotion or demotion processing, discharge actions, appeal
processing, and appropriate assignment actions by the Air Force Personnel Center
(AFPC), Air Reserve Personnel Center (ARPC), Air Force Reserve Command
(AFRC), or Individual Reservist Readiness Integration Organization (RIO); Air
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 13
Force Colonel Management Office (AF/A1LO), Air Force General Officer
Management Office (AF/A1LG), Air Force CMSgt Management Office
(AF/A1LE), or Air Force Reserve Senior Leader Management Office (AF/REG),
or HQ Space Force, Senior Leader Management (SF/S1L) assignment personnel.
Authorized personnel will provide copies. (T-1)
1.4.5.1.1.2. On written authority of AF/A1LG for general officers; AF/A1LO for
colonels on EAD; SF/S1L for Space Force general officers and colonels;
AFPC/DP3SP for lieutenant colonels and below on EAD; or the ARPC/DPTSE for
Air National Guard (ANG) colonels and below, Air Force Reserve (AFR) officers
not on EAD, and Active Guard Reserve (AGR) or voluntary limited period of active
duty officers. (T-1)
1.4.5.1.1.3. As authorized by AFI 33-332, Air Force Privacy and Civil Liberties
Program, when requested by the ratee or their designated legal representative.
1.4.5.1.1.4. As required, provide copies for file in ARMS and PRDA, the officer
selection record (OSR) or SNCO selection record, the officer command selection
record, or adjutant general or national guard or human resource record file.
1.4.5.1.1.5. To replace missing or lost documents in the Master Personnel Records
Group. Forms not digitally signed must be certified as a true copy. (T-1)
1.4.5.2. Corrected Copies. A corrected copy may be either a copy or an original document
which contains changes from the original document. Corrections authorized by the Air
Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) or ERAB on “wet signature”
evaluations may require a corrected copy annotation. In these cases, the following
statement will be entered on the reverse bottom margin: “Corrected Copy, AFPC/DPMSPE
or ARPC/DPT, XX XXX XX [date correction made], and certifying official’s typed
signature block and signature.” (T-1)
1.4.5.3. Legibility. The CSS, MPF, and AFPC/DPMSPE will return copies that are
difficult to read or do not comply with paragraph 1.4.5. (T-1)
1.4.6. Showing and/or providing copies to the ratee. Unless the evaluation is a referral,
evaluators are not required to show or provide a copy of the evaluation to the ratee until the
“Ratee’s Acknowledgement” is ready for completion. (T-1)
1.4.7. Inactivated Organizations. If a unit inactivates on or after the accounting date for any
evaluation static close-out date (SCOD), the inactivated unit will accomplish the evaluations,
to include all forced distribution and senior rater endorsement processes. If the unit inactivates
before the accounting date, the gaining unit (the unit as of the accounting date) will accomplish
all evaluation-related matters. All affected units will coordinate with AFPC/DPMSPE on all
actions associated with inactivating units. (T-1)
1.4.8. Duty Air Force Specialty Code (DAFSC) or Duty Space Force Specialty Code
(DSFSC). The DAFSC or DSFSC is based on the unit manpower document authorization.
1.4.8.1. (RegAF and ARC officers only) Use the DAFSC assigned against and approved
by AFPC as of the established SCOD (see Table 3.4), as reflected within the Military
Personnel Data System (MilPDS); however, if the officer has a permanent change of station
(PCS) or permanent change of assignment (PCA), or departs from a 365-day extended
14 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
deployment on or after the accounting date, use the DAFSC as of the established
accounting date (see Table 3.5.).
1.4.8.2. (USSF officers only) Use the DSFSC assigned against and approved by AFPC
as of the close-out date of the evaluation, as reflected within MilPDS.
1.4.8.3. If an officer’s DAFSC or DSFSC is incorrect, initiate corrective action
immediately, annotate the correct DAFSC or DSFSC on the evaluation, and attach a copy
of the documentation reflecting the correction. MPF/CSS personnel must confirm the
requested change was approved and that the effective date of the change was on or before
the close-out date of the evaluation before forwarding the evaluation to AFPC/ARPC.
(T-1) If the requested change has not been approved by the date the evaluation is ready to
send to AFPC/ARPC, the DAFSC or DSFSC on the evaluation will be changed to match
the DAFSC or DSFSC approved by the respective HQ AFPC officer assignment manager
in MilPDS. (T-1)
1.4.8.4. For enlisted personnel, use the DAFSC or DSFSC as of the established SCOD. If
the Airman or Guardian has a PCS or PCA or departs from a 365-day extended deployment
on or after the accounting date, use the DAFSC or DSFSC as of the established accounting
date. CSS/MPF personnel must ensure the correct information is reflected and/or updated
in MilPDS.
1.4.8.5. For a 365-day extended deployment billet, use the DAFSC or DSFSC assigned to
the position and/or billet that the ratee is officially filling in the deployed location.
1.4.9. Grade Data.
1.4.9.1. For RegAF officers and DAF enlisted personnel, the grade will be the actual grade
the ratee will hold as of the established SCOD, unless the ratee has been selected to the
next higher grade, then use the selected grade (e.g., Lt Col (S) or TSgt-select). (T-1) For
ARC officers, the grade will be the actual grade the ratee will hold as of the established
SCOD. (T-1) The use of the select status for FGO evaluations corresponds to the public
release date of promotion to the next higher grade or once an officer’s promotion
nomination has been transmitted to the White House. The use of the select status for first
lieutenants selected to captain corresponds to the date of AFPC or ARPC public release of
the promotion list or once SecDef approves the promotion lists. The use of “select” is not
utilized for lieutenant evaluations. For USSF officer grades, the grades must be the actual
grade as of the close-out date of the evaluation. (T-1)
1.4.9.2. Frocking is the practice of authorizing members who are selected for promotion
to wear the higher grade before the actual promotion date.
1.4.9.2.1. If a RegAF officer has been frocked, select the member’s selected grade
(e.g., Col-select).
1.4.9.2.2. If a USSF officer has been frocked, use the actual grade for the USSF officer
versus the frocked grade.
1.4.9.2.3. If a CMSgt has been frocked, the grade must be the actual grade for USSF
and the select grade for RegAF (i.e., CMSgt select) as of the close-out date of the
evaluation.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 15
1.4.10. Fitness and Body Composition Assessments.
1.4.10.1. It is the commander’s discretion to annotate a non-current or failed fitness
assessment and/or body composition assessment within the reporting period on an
evaluation. Additionally, it is the commander’s discretion to document the evaluation as a
referral for a non-current or failed fitness assessment and/or body composition assessment
as of the close-out date.
1.4.10.2. Comments regarding unit fitness achievements are authorized for Airmen or
Guardians who have a key role in the success of unit physical training programs.
Comments may include performance by physical training leaders, unit fitness program
managers, first sergeants, superintendents, section commanders, flight chiefs,
commanders, and other members deemed integral to a particular organization's successful
fitness program.
1.4.10.3. Do not include fitness or body composition scores or fitness categories on an
evaluation unless the individual did not meet fitness and/or body composition standards
(see paragraph 1.4.10.1.). This does not prevent an evaluator from documenting referral
comments in other areas outside of the fitness and/or body composition area when an
Airman or Guardian displays a negative/inappropriate attitude regarding the member’s
fitness or has not demonstrated fitness improvement. In those cases, the referral comments
will address the behavior. (T-1)
1.4.10.4. Do not comment on an exemption or the reason for exemption. (T-1)
1.4.10.5. Extensions to SCODs are not authorized.
1.4.11. Non-Rated Periods. In particular circumstances, non-rated periods may be authorized.
The documentation and/or approval authority required will vary depending on the nature of the
circumstances. Likewise, the duration of authorized non-rated periods may also vary
depending on the circumstances and other factors. Therefore, non-rated periods must be
considered individually as each Airman’s or Guardian’s circumstance and response are unique.
Being TDY or deployed is not an example of a non-rated period. The following areas may
warrant a non-rated period:
1.4.11.1. Medical (physical, physiological, and/or psychological conditions;
hospitalization, and/or convalescence in excess of 80 calendar days, including, but not
limited to, Airmen or Guardians in Patient Status): The Airman’s or Guardian’s provider
will initiate the recommendation for a non-rated period to the Airman’s or Guardian’s unit
commander using AF Form 469, Duty Limiting Condition Report.
1.4.11.1.1. Unit Commander (or equivalent) Duties and Considerations. The
presumption will be in favor of the Airman or Guardian requesting the non-rated
period. Counsel Airmen or Guardians directly to ensure they are fully informed
regarding the reasonably foreseeable career impacts (and re-accomplish counseling
prior to 60-day extensions, if applicable).
1.4.11.1.2. Approval Authority. The unit commander or equivalent is the approval
authority. If the approval authority recommends disapproval, they must provide
justification and forward the request to the member’s wing or delta commander or
equivalent (delegable no lower than the vice wing or vice delta commander or
16 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
equivalent) for final approval or disapproval. (T-1) This may be accomplished on the
AF Form 469 or a separate memorandum.
1.4.11.2. Sexual Assault (unrestricted reports only). The Airman or Guardian will submit
the request using memorandum format (see example in Attachment 3) to their unit
commander/equivalent for approval. The unit commander or director will determine the
length of the non-rated period. It is prohibited to include comments on any correspondence
relating to or regarding the member’s filing of a report of sexual assault, receiving support
services, and/or participating in the investigative process and/or judicial proceedings.
1.4.11.2.1. Approval Authority. See paragraph 1.4.11.1.2.
1.4.11.3. Military or Civilian Confinement. Non-rated periods of supervision, regardless
of the number of days served, may be considered for Airmen or Guardians in confinement
during the reporting period. The ratee's unit commander or equivalent will subtract periods
of confinement using the total days documented on DAF Form 2098, Duty Status Change,
from the total number days of supervision, with the exception of Directed by Commander
(DBC) reports. DBC reports accomplished to capture the egregious event(s) that resulted
in confinement will not subtract days of confinement from the total number of days
supervision.
1.4.11.4. Lengthy Initial Skills and Advanced Training Courses (enlisted only). Non-rated
periods are considered only for initial skills or advanced training courses more than 20
continuous weeks. The following training courses do not qualify for use of non-rated:
initial skills and advanced training courses that are under 20 continuous weeks; all other 3-
, 5-, or 7-level training courses under 20 continuous weeks; or other specific skills-training
courses (e.g., field detachment training, flight requalification courses, pre-deployment
training) for which the ratee travels TDY.
1.4.11.4.1. Approval Authority. AFPC/DP3SP serves as the approval authority for
RegAF and USSF members and ARPC/DPTS serves as the approval authority for ARC
members for courses requesting consideration for non-rated periods of supervision. All
requests must be signed/submitted by the applicable training course’s administrative
control (ADCON) wing or delta commander/senior rater. For AETC courses of
instruction, requests will be routed through 2nd Air Force, Manpower, Personnel, and
Services Directorate (2 AF/A1), who will review, consolidate, provide a
recommendation, and then forward to AFPC/DP3SP for final approval.
1.4.11.4.2. A minimum of one performance statement is required in the rater’s and
Higher-Level Reviewer’s (HLR) comments sections. “THIS SECTION NOT USED,”
may be used as a mandatory performance statement.
1.4.11.4.3. A minimum of one bullet is required in Sections III and IV of the AF Form
911, and Sections III, IV and V of the DAF Form 910. (T-1) Comments are optional
in the remaining sections of both forms. When comments are not included, enter the
statement “THIS SECTION NOT USED.” Exception: Referral evaluations will
require the applicable referral comments in Section VII, VIII and/or Section IX of the
AF Form 911, and Section VIII and/or Section IX of the DAF Form 910. Note:
Training squadrons are prohibited from replicating bullets for use across multiple
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 17
enlisted evaluations. Comments must be unique to each trainee’s accomplishments and
level of performance.
1.4.11.5. Personal Hardships. Commanders may designate periods as non-rated if they
determine an Airman or Guardian is undergoing or has undergone personal hardships
during the reporting period.
1.4.11.6. Notification. Once the non-rated period is approved, notify the Airman’s or
Guardian’s rater and annotate the evaluation accordingly. If additional non-rated periods
are deemed necessary, notification will follow in the same manner.
1.4.11.7. Reporting. The rater will not consider nor comment on the Airman’s or
Guardian’s performance (to include any misconduct) during a non-rated period. However,
the rater may include significant accomplishments if requested by the ratee. For DAF
enlisted, if the non-rated period covers the entire reporting period, enter the statement:
“Airman/Guardian is not rated for this period: (date) through (date). No comments
authorized in accordance with DAFI 36-2406” in Sections III, IV, and V in the DAF Form
910; in Sections III and IV in the AF Form 911. Enter “THIS SECTION NOT USED” in
sections VIII and IX of DAF Form 910 or sections VII, VIII or IX of the AF Form 911.
For USSF officers, enter the statement: “Guardian is not rated for this period: (date)
through (date). No comments authorized in accordance with DAFI 36-2406,” in sections
IV, V, and VI of the AF Form 707. For RegAF and ARC officers, enter the statement:
“Airman is not rated for this period: (date) through (date). No comments authorized in
accordance with DAFI 36-2406” into all major performance areas and HLR comment
section on the officer ALQ evaluation. Note: TSgt and below members who are TIG/TIS
eligible will receive a forced distribution promotion recommendation.
1.4.12. Signatures, Signature Elements and Dates.
1.4.12.1. General Signature and Date Guidelines.
1.4.12.1.1. Do not sign or date before the close-out or “Thru” date. Sign on or after.
(T-1)
1.4.12.1.2. Do not sign blank forms/briefs that do not contain ratings or comments.
(T-1)
1.4.12.1.3. Do not use “auto-signature” pens or delegated Common Access
Card/digital signatures. (T-1)
1.4.12.1.4. Do not delay signing an evaluation due to pending personnel changes,
promotions, or approval of a more prestigious duty title. (T-1)
1.4.12.1.5. Do not “back date” the signature. Exception: If, after referring an
evaluation to the ratee, the evaluation is reprinted for the purpose of including all
evaluator comments or for making minor administrative corrections that do not require
an additional referral to the ratee, all signature dates, up to and including the referring
official(s), should reflect the date it was originally signed. This is necessary to show
the dates each referral action actually occurred to ensure the evaluation was properly
processed. All evaluators, subsequent to the (last) referring official will use either
original signature dates or current signature dates. (T-1)
18 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
1.4.12.1.6. (USSF only) If an evaluator is the functional/acquisition examiner and the
Space Force advisor, identify both positions by placing an “X” in both the examiner
and the advisor blocks.
1.4.12.2. Digital Signatures and Dates.
1.4.12.2.1. Evaluators (raters and additional raters) and reviewers/HLRs will use
digital signatures to the maximum extent possible. (T-1) However, if unable to utilize
digital signature, the rating chain may use a combination of a digital, a “wet” signature,
or a typed signature. For the typed signature, the rating chain may use the approved
typed signature in the “Signature” block located below the “Duty Title” and “Date”
blocks. The approved typed signature must include: two backslashes at the front and
two backslashes at the end, the word “signed,” the signatory’s initials, DoD ID number,
and date of the typed signature. (T-1) The typed signature format is: \\signed, xxx,
DoD ID #, DD Mmm YY\\. Note: When “wet” signed, print Forms 707, 715, 716, 910,
911, and 912, head to foot and handwrite or stamp the dates. Note: Typed signatures
are not authorized on the DAF 709.
1.4.12.2.1.1. If a signature cannot be obtained, AFPC/DP3SP will assist RegAF
and USSF members and ARPC/DPTSE will assist ARC members in completing
the evaluation before the next level rater/reviewer signs and forwards the evaluation
to AFPC or ARPC. (T-2) If using the typed signature with the DoD ID number,
signatories have the option to include or exclude the last four digits of their Social
Security number in the “SSN” block.
1.4.12.2.1.2. In all instances, the rater is responsible to provide the ratee an
opportunity to view the final version of the evaluation even if the ratee is unable to
sign the evaluation. (T-2)
1.4.12.2.1.3. In the event the mitigations above are unsuccessful, AFPC/DP3SP
will assist members in completing the evaluation; ARPC/DPTSE will assist ARC
members in completing the evaluation. (T-2).
1.4.12.2.2. Evaluation forms are enabled with digital signature and auto date
capability. Forms will auto-date only when a digital signature is applied.
1.4.12.2.2.1. Subsequent evaluators are unable to sign before the previous
evaluator due to the security features associated with the digital signature
capability.
1.4.12.2.2.2. Each evaluator’s digital signature will lock their comments and
ratings; additionally, it will unlock the digital signature feature for the next
evaluator.
1.4.12.2.2.3. The Air Force or Space Force advisor/functional examiner and forced
distributor or unit commander/military or civilian director/other authorized
reviewer digital signature capabilities are not locked and are independent of other
evaluator signatures.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 19
1.4.12.3. For Brigadier General (Brig Gen) and Major General (Maj Gen):
1.4.12.3.1. For Brig Gen Selects and Maj Gen Selects. Upon Senate confirmation,
selects may sign all evaluations as “Brig Gen (Sel)” or “Maj Gen (Sel)”, only when
serving in a senior rater/ reviewer position or assigned to an authorized Brig Gen/Maj
Gen position.
1.4.12.3.2. Frocked. For all evaluations, sign as “Brig Gen” or “Maj Gen”.
1.4.12.3.3. Upon Senate confirmation, for a Brig Gen-select who is already the
designated senior rater for the lieutenants through majors in an organization, the
management level must realign their senior rater identifications (SRID) and re-
designate the selectee as the senior rater for the colonels and lieutenant colonels of the
organization.
1.4.12.3.4. There can only be one senior rater on a report; see paragraph 1.7.1.7 for
exceptions.
1.4.12.3.4.1. Only one general officer or equivalent will sign an evaluation as an
evaluator/reviewer. (T-1)
1.4.12.3.4.2. Senior Executive Service (SES) and General Officer Equivalents.
SES employees are typically general officer equivalents and, for some, senior rater
positions. On evaluations, if an SES employee is a senior rater, then a general
officer cannot sign the report. However, if an SES employee is not a senior rater
and falls under a general officer who is a senior rater, then both the SES employee
and general officer signatures may sign the report. There can be two SES employee
signatures on an evaluation report if only one of them is designated by the
management level as a senior rater and a general officer who is not a senior rater is
not signing the report. An SES employee is only required to use the term “Senior
Executive Service” and the level is optional in the signature element.
1.5. Evaluator Requirements.
1.5.1. Number of Evaluators.
1.5.1.1. RegAF and ARC officer evaluations will have two evaluators, unless the rater is
also the HLR. (T-1) USSF officer evaluations will have three evaluators unless the rater
or additional rater is also the reviewer/senior rater. (T-1)
1.5.1.2. Enlisted evaluations will have at least two evaluators, unless the rater qualifies as
a single evaluator. (T-1) For ALQ evaluations there only two evaluators. (T-1)
1.5.1.3. DAF Form 78 and AF Form 3538 will have two evaluators unless one evaluator
qualifies as a single evaluator. (T-1)
1.5.1.4. PRFs will have only one evaluator.
1.5.1.5. Training reports (TRs) will have only one evaluator unless there is a disagreement
(paragraph 1.9); or the evaluation is referred, and the commander is not the evaluator
named in the referral document as referral reviewer (paragraph 1.10); or the reviewer is
senior to the commander and refers the evaluation.
1.5.2. Grade Requirement for Raters and Evaluators.
20 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
1.5.2.1. Raters.
1.5.2.1.1. For officers. The rater will be an officer of the U.S. or foreign military, or a
civilian of equal or higher rank or grade than the ratee. (T-1)
1.5.2.1.2. For enlisted. The rater will be an officer, another enlisted member of equal
or higher rank or grade than the ratee, or a civilian at least GS-5/NH-II/equivalent or
higher and in a position higher in the rating chain than the ratee. A senior airman (SrA)
or a specialist 4 (Spc4) must complete Airman Leadership School or Space Force
equivalent prior to assuming or being assigned rater responsibilities. (T-1)
1.5.2.1.3. Additional Requirements for Individual Mobilization Augmentees (IMA).
The rater will not normally be another IMA. When circumstances require an IMA
directly supervise another IMA, the rater will be appointed by the respective unit
commander/director in coordination with the IMA’s assigned detachment commander.
IMAs or Traditional Reservists may supervise/rate RegAF and/or USSF personnel only
if on consecutive active-duty military personnel appropriation orders for a minimum of
120 calendar days. Reserve members on active-duty orders for a minimum of 120
calendar days or members on statutory tours may supervise/rate RegAF and/or USSF
members under their command or operational direction. (T-1) See DAFI 51-509,
Appointment to and Assumption of Command.
1.5.2.2. Additional Raters.
1.5.2.2.1. (USSF only) For officers. The additional rater will be an officer in the US
or foreign military or a civilian serving in a grade equal to or higher than the rater, and
in a grade higher than the ratee. Exception: An O-6 of the US or a foreign military
service may be the additional rater for an O-6. (T-1)
1.5.2.2.2. For Enlisted. The additional rater will be an officer or E-7 or above in the
U.S. or foreign military serving in a grade equal to or higher than the rater. When the
rater’s rater does not meet the grade requirements, the additional rater will be the next
evaluator in the rating chain that meets the requirements. (T-1)
1.5.2.3. Civilian Additional Raters.
1.5.2.3.1. For enlisted. A civilian additional rater must be serving in a civilian grade
equal to or higher than the rater. (T-1)
1.5.2.3.2. For TSgt and below. A civilian additional rater must be at least a GS-7/NH-
II/equivalent. (T-2)
1.5.2.3.3. For MSgt-CMSgt. A civilian additional rater must be at least a GS-11/NH-
II/equivalent. (T-1)
1.5.2.3.4. For Enlisted Individual Mobilization Augmentees. The additional rater is
defined in the paragraphs above and must be in the RegAF rating chain. (T-1)
1.5.2.3.5. For USSF officers, a civilian additional rater must be in a civilian grade
equal to or higher than the rater.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 21
1.5.2.4. Senior Rater.
1.5.2.4.1. Senior raters are assigned to and identified by the senior rater position
designated by the management level for the ratee’s assigned organizational personnel
accounting symbol (PAS) code. (T-2) One senior rater may be assigned to two separate
senior rater positions at the same time. However, a head of management level may not
serve as head of two separate management levels.
1.5.2.4.2. The head of management level, normally the MAJCOM/CC or
FLDCOM/CC, designates all senior rater positions. Appointment of command (G-
series orders) does not automatically authorize senior rater status.
1.5.2.4.3. AFRC may deviate and assign senior rater levels as appropriate for AFR unit
assigned majors and below. (T-2)
1.5.2.5. (RegAF and ARC officers only) Higher Level Reviewer/Final Evaluator. The
HLR is the final evaluator on the ALQ evaluation. The HLR is a senior leader who has
direct knowledge of and visibility on the performance of the ratee within their peer group
during the evaluation period. The intent is to improve Airmen’s experience in receiving
meaningful and actionable feedback on performance evaluations reviewed by the
designated senior leader.
1.5.2.5.1. For RegAF and AFR Colonels. The HLR will be the first general
officer/senior executive service employee/equivalent, including selects, in the rating
chain designated as a senior rater by the management level for RegAF, or for the AFR
is in a designated senior rater billet. (T-1) The HLR is authorized as a single evaluator.
See paragraph 1.5.2.5.5.
1.5.2.5.2. For RegAF and AFR Lieutenant Colonels and Below. The HLR will be the
first colonel/GS-15/equivalent, or higher, in the rating chain designated as a senior rater
by the management level. (T-1) The HLR is authorized as a single evaluator. See
paragraph 1.5.2.5.5.
1.5.2.5.3. For ANG Colonels. The HLR will be the first general officer in the rating
chain. (T-1)
1.5.2.5.4. For ANG Lieutenant Colonels and Below. The HLR is the wing or group
commander. (T-1) For a member assigned to a unit where there is no parent wing or
group headquarters in-state, the state Adjutant General will establish an equivalent
command-level review authority.
1.5.2.5.5. Only a senior rater is authorized as a single evaluator. If the primary rater
meets HLR requirements but is not a senior rater, the next rater up the rating chain must
be the HLR. (T-1) See paragraph 3.14.4.1.
1.5.2.6. (USSF officers only) Reviewer/Final Evaluator. The reviewer is the final
evaluator on the officer evaluation and must be the ratee’s senior rater. (T-1) Exception:
When the rater is also the senior rater, the officer evaluation will close at this level. See
Tables 3.1 and 3.3.
1.5.2.6.1. For USSF Colonels and Lieutenant Colonels. The reviewer/final evaluator
is the first general officer/senior executive service employee/equivalent, including
selects, in the rating chain designated as a senior rater management level.
22 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
1.5.2.6.2. For USSF Majors and Below. The reviewer/final evaluator is the first
colonel/GS-15/NF-IV/equivalent in a delta commander, senior materiel leader (SML)-
upper, FLDCOM director, or equivalent position designated as a senior rater. (T-1)
1.6. Roles and Responsibilities.
1.6.1. Commander.
1.6.1.1. The commander of an organization must review the records of all personnel,
regardless of grade, assigned/attached under their command, to ensure the knowledge of
and familiarization of the Airman’s or Guardian’s history, to include any sex-related
offenses, nonjudicial punishment, or other punitive administrative action. (T-2) Sex-
related offenses may include violations or attempted violations of the Uniform Code of
Military Justice (UCMJ), Articles 93a, 120, 120b, 120c, 130, certain offenses under 134,
or equivalent state offenses.
1.6.1.2. Commanders will ensure supervisors are properly trained and educated on how to
write a performance evaluation. (T-3)
1.6.2. General Evaluator/Reviewer/Higher Level Reviewer (HLR) Responsibilities. All
evaluators, reviewers, and HLRs are responsible for performing an administrative review of
all evaluations and, if necessary, return them for correction/completion before forwarding to
the next level to ensure:
1.6.2.1. All applicable blocks are completed (marked, dated, and signed). (T-1)
1.6.2.2. Evaluations contain accurate information (particularly in the ratee identification
and job description sections). (T-1)
1.6.2.3. Evaluations do not contain inappropriate comments or recommendations. (T-1)
1.6.2.4. Evaluations are properly referred, when necessary. (T-1)
1.6.2.5. When required on the evaluation form, evaluators (except civilian and foreign-
service evaluators) must provide the last four numbers of SSN. (T-1). Use the SSN to
verify the identity of the evaluator for research and accountability.
1.6.3. Rater.
1.6.3.1. For RegAF and ARC officer evaluations, the required minimum number of days
of supervision ranges from 60 to 120 calendar days for each grade until the first SCOD for
that grade is implemented (see Table 3.4); at the first SCOD for each grade, there will be
no minimum days of supervision to prepare an evaluation. (T-1) For DAF enlisted
evaluations, there is no minimum days of supervision to prepare an evaluation. (T-1) For
USSF officer evaluations, the required minimum number of days of supervision ranges
from 60 to 120 calendar days. (T-1) See Table 3.3.
1.6.3.2. Ensures the ratee is aware of who is in their rating chain. (T-1)
1.6.3.3. Provides a performance feedback assessment in accordance with Chapter 2. If
geographically separated, assessments can be performed electronically or telephonically.
(T-1)
1.6.3.4. Considers the contents of any Unfavorable Information File (UIF) and/or personal
information file (PIF), if applicable, before preparing the performance evaluation. (T-1)
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 23
1.6.3.5. Assesses and documents the ratee’s performance, what the ratee did, how well
they did it, and the ratee’s potential based on that performance, throughout the rating
period. The rater differentiates ratees through an evaluation of performance. (T-1)
1.6.3.6. Receives meaningful information from the ratee and as many sources as possible
(e.g., letters of evaluation (LOE) from those who previously supervised the ratee during
the reporting period, the first sergeant, etc.), especially when the rater cannot observe the
ratee personally. The ratee is encouraged to provide the rater with inputs on specific
accomplishments; however, the ratee will not be directed to write or draft any portion of
their own performance report. Air Reserve Component (ARC) members should provide
information to the supervisor to assist in the preparation of the evaluation, including
notable military accomplishments for end-of-tour evaluations.
1.6.3.7. Considers the significance and frequency of incidents (including isolated
instances of poor or outstanding performance) when assessing total performance.
1.6.3.8. Differentiates between ratees with similar performance records, especially when
making promotion, stratification, assignment, developmental education and retention
recommendations when not prohibited by this DAFI or other special program specific
guidance.
1.6.3.9. Records the ratee’s performance for the rating period on the applicable form.
1.6.3.10. A rater’s failure to perform one or more of the above responsibilities alone will
not form the basis for a successful appeal.
1.6.3.11. (RegAF and ARC only) Raters will measure an Airman’s performance using a
whole person concept relative to the ratee’s specific grade, AFSC, level of responsibility,
and assigned duties throughout the entire rating period using the four major performance
areas.
1.6.3.11.1. Executing the Mission. Raters should consider how well the ratee
effectively uses knowledge, initiative, and adaptability to produce timely, high
quality/quantity results to positively impact the mission.
1.6.3.11.2. Leading People. Raters should consider how well the ratee fosters cohesive
teams, effectively communicates, and uses emotional intelligence to take care of people
and accomplish the mission.
1.6.3.11.3. Managing Resources. Raters should consider how well the ratee manages
assigned resources effectively and takes responsibility for actions/behaviors to
maximize organizational performance.
1.6.3.11.4. Improving the Unit. Raters should consider how well the ratee
demonstrates critical thinking and fosters innovation to find creative solutions and
improve mission execution.
1.6.4. (USSF Officers and DAF Enlisted only) Additional Rater. Note: For RegAF and
ARC this only applies to DAF Form 910 and AF Form 911.
1.6.4.1. There is no minimum number of days supervision required.
24 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
1.6.4.2. Reviews the content of any UIF and/or PIF, if applicable, and returns evaluations
to raters for reconsideration, if appropriate, to ensure an accurate, unbiased, and an
uninflated evaluation.
1.6.4.3. Completes Section VIII of the DAF Form 910, and Section VII of the AF Form
911 by concurring or non-concurring with the rater and making comments.
1.6.4.4. Assumes the responsibilities of the rater when paragraph 1.7 applies. Note:
This does not include PCS, PCA, separation, or retirement of the rater.
1.6.5. Reviewer/Senior Rater/Final Evaluator/Higher Level Reviewer.
1.6.5.1. There is no minimum number of days supervision required.
1.6.5.2. Reviews the content of any UIF and/or PIF, if applicable, and returns the
evaluation to the rater for reconsideration, if appropriate, to ensure an accurate, unbiased,
and uninflated evaluation.
1.6.5.3. Obtains additional information, if necessary, from competent sources such as the
ratee’s second- and third-line supervisor.
1.6.5.4. Non-concurs with previous evaluators and makes comments, when applicable.
1.6.5.5. (RegAF and ARC only) (Senior Rater only) Approves the unit mission
descriptions for the PRF. (T-2)
1.6.5.6. (USSF Officer and DAF Enlisted only) Directs the additional rater to assume
rater’s responsibilities when paragraph 1.7 applies. (T-2)
1.6.5.7. Completes performance evaluations as required. See applicable chapters and/or
references/documents cited in paragraph 1.2. (T-2)
1.6.6. First Sergeant.
1.6.6.1. Will not assume rater/additional rater responsibilities. (T-2)
1.6.6.2. Will be aware of the contents of the UIF and/or PIF if applicable, on all enlisted
evaluations, regardless of grade, and returns the evaluation to the rater for reconsideration,
if appropriate, to ensure an accurate, unbiased, and an uninflated evaluation. (T-2)
1.6.6.3. Will review all enlisted evaluations before the commander’s review and advise
the commander of any quality force indicators. (T-2)
1.6.6.4. SNCOs will only be designated for organizations for which no 8F000/first
sergeant authorization exists. (T-2) Additional duty first sergeants will not complete
evaluation reviews in-lieu of an organization’s 8F000/first sergeant. Exception: Interim
first sergeants, additional duty first sergeants, or designated SNCOs may complete
evaluation reviews when the organization’s 8F000/first sergeant is unavailable due to
extended absence (e.g., deployment, lengthy training, or lengthy convalescent leave).
(T-2)
1.6.7. Forced Distributor or Unit Commander/Military or Civilian Director/Other Authorized
Reviewer Designated in Writing.
1.6.7.1. Conducts the commander’s review on enlisted evaluations. (T-2)
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 25
1.6.7.2. Reviews the content of any UIF and/or PIF, if applicable, and returns the
evaluation to the rater for reconsideration, if appropriate, to ensure an accurate, unbiased,
and an uninflated evaluation. (T-2)
1.6.7.3. The review is performed by the commander, director, or other delegated
officer/official on G-series orders. Delegated members will use their assigned duty title on
the enlisted evaluation-- not "Commander" or "Director." (T-2) The unit
commander/military or civilian director/other authorized reviewer's review will be
accomplished by the home station commander for all individuals assigned to 365-day
extended deployment, regardless of the grade of the deployed rater and additional rater.
(T-2)
1.6.7.4. Flight commanders are not authorized to sign in this area.
1.6.7.5. Commandants for the Senior Noncommissioned Officer Academy (SNCOA) and
Noncommissioned Officer Academy (NCOA) designated in writing by the commander
complete the unit commander/military or civilian director/other authorized reviewer’s
review on the MSgt thru SMSgt enlisted evaluation only. (T-2) Additionally, the SNCOA
Commandant is designated as the final evaluator when the AF Form 911 is not
endorsed/stratified by the senior rater or the SNCO is non-promotion eligible. The SNCOA
Commandant is also authorized to sign Section IX of DAF Form 910 for non-promotion
eligible Airmen or Guardians or if an enlisted force distribution is not warranted.
Furthermore, if a ratee is not promotion eligible, or if a senior rater endorsement and/or
stratification is not warranted, the SNCOA Commandant may act as the final evaluator on
MSgt and SMSgt enlisted evaluations within their direct rating chain and/or scope of
responsibility.
1.6.7.6. Manages the performance evaluation program for the organization.
1.6.7.7. Ensures all evaluations accurately describe performance and make realistic
recommendations for advancement.
1.6.7.8. (RegAF and ARC only) Prepares and maintains the unit mission description for
the PRF.
1.6.7.9. Determines the rating chain for assigned personnel based on Air Force or Space
Force and management level policy.
1.6.7.9.1. The ratee’s parent management level must approve rating chains that involve
evaluators from other management levels.
1.6.7.9.2. For rating chain deviations see paragraph 1.7.
1.6.7.10. Ensures that no one in the rating chain is related to the member. (T-1)
1.6.7.11. Ensures the first sergeant (or additional duty first sergeant/designated SNCO)
conducts a quality force review on all enlisted evaluations before conducting the
commander’s review. (T-1)
1.6.8. Functional Examiner, Acquisition Examiner and Air Force or Space Force Advisor.
1.6.8.1. Functional/Acquisition Examiner or Air Force or Space Force Advisor Block.
26 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
1.6.8.1.1. For enlisted evaluations that do not include an examiner/advisor block, a
DAF Form 77 may be completed.
1.6.8.1.1.1. Functional/acquisition examiners or Air Force or Space Force advisors
who desire to make comments may attach an DAF Form 77 for DAF enlisted and
USSF officer evaluations. For RegAF and ARC officer evaluations,
functional/acquisition examiners or Air Force advisors may provide comments on
the officer ALQ evaluation.
1.6.8.1.1.2. Comments are not mandatory; however, if used, the intent of these
comments are to provide clarification and ensure the evaluation is written in
accordance with DAF policy and standards in a joint environment or to clarify
functional or acquisition-related considerations; not to list additional
accomplishments or voice disagreement with an evaluator’s assessment.
Comments are limited to five lines on the DAF Form 77, or to the space available
in myEval.
1.6.8.1.1.3. (USSF Officers and DAF Enlisted only) The DAF Form 77 will be
prepared and electronically forwarded along with the electronic evaluation. (T-1)
1.6.8.1.2. Functional/acquisition examiners or Air Force or Space Force advisors will
not change any statement or rating on the evaluation. (T-1)
1.6.8.1.3. If the functional/acquisition examiner and the Air Force or Space Force
advisor are the same person, both positions will be indicated; both the functional
examiner and Air Force or Space Force advisor blocks will be marked on the
evaluation. For evaluations that do not include the examiner/advisor block (i.e.,
Training Reports (TR)), the examiner/advisor will indicate both positions on the DAF
Form 77. (T-1)
1.6.8.1.4. (USSF Officers and DAF Enlisted only) When the examiner and advisor
are two different people on an evaluation, the person who receives the evaluation first
will complete the functional examiner/Air Force or Space Force advisor block on the
evaluation, and the next person will complete a DAF Form 77. For evaluations that do
not include the examiner/advisor block, an DAF Form 77 will be prepared for each.
(T-1)
1.6.8.1.5. (AF Form 707 only) When the examiner and advisor are two different
people on an evaluation, the person who receives the evaluation first will complete the
functional examiner/Air Force or Space Force advisor block on the evaluation, and the
next person will complete an additional functional examiner/Air Force or Space Force
advisor block.
1.6.8.2. Air Force or Space Force Advisor Program.
1.6.8.2.1. When the final evaluator on an evaluation or TR is not an Air Force or Space
Force military member or civilian employee, an Air Force or Space Force advisor will
be designated to advise raters on matters pertaining to Air Force or Space Force
evaluations. (T-2)
1.6.8.2.1.1. The senior Air Force/Space Force military member on duty with the
activity/agency assumes this position. The management level may designate any
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 27
Air Force/Space Force member or Department of the Air Force official meeting the
grade requirement with the activity/agency to serve as advisor.
1.6.8.2.1.1.1. For officers, the advisor will be a colonel or above. (T-2)
1.6.8.2.1.1.2. For SNCOs, the advisor will be a major or above. (T-2)
1.6.8.2.1.1.3. For noncommissioned officers (NCO), the advisor will be a
master sergeant or above. (T-2)
1.6.8.2.1.1.4. For IMAs and Participating Individual Ready Reserve (PIRR)
members, the advisor is the person appointed by the management level for the
active force (for IMAs this will be unit of assignment; for PIRR members this
will be unit of attachment).
1.6.8.2.1.2. When an agency (e.g., DoD departments, non-Department of the Air
Force schools/units) has only one Air Force or one Space Force member assigned,
the management level for that activity appoints an advisor.
1.6.8.2.1.3. If the commander or designated Air Force or Space Force
officer/senior official who completes the "commander's review" is senior/equal to
the last evaluator (or is also the unit’s designated advisor) and meets the Air Force
or Space Force advisor grade requirement, the advisor statement does not need to
be completed.
1.6.8.2.2. (AF Form 707 only) The advisor signs prior to the final evaluator
regardless of grade.
1.6.8.2.3. An Air Force or Space Force advisor will have, or be able to obtain,
knowledge of the ratee, be higher in grade than the ratee and, when feasible, be equal
to or higher in grade than the HLR/reviewer (officers) or final evaluator (enlisted).
Additionally, an O-6 cannot sign on another O-6. (T-1)
1.6.8.3. Functional Examiner. Designated to ensure functional oversight is provided for
individuals in specific career fields. The examiner accomplishes the examination after the
entire rating chain has completed the performance evaluation. If an Air Force or Space
Force advisor review is also required, the examiner forwards the evaluation to the advisor.
Otherwise, the examiner forwards the evaluation to the rater to finalize the evaluation.
Note: The examiner will not change any statement or rating on an evaluation, nor will
any comments be used for accolades or recommendations. If comments are used, the
examiner is limited to five lines placed on DAF Form 77 for USSF officers and DAF
enlisted. (T-2) For RegAF and ARC officers, if comments are provided, the examiner is
limited to the space available in myEval. (T-2)
1.6.8.4. Acquisition Examiner.
1.6.8.4.1. In accordance with 10 U.S.C. § Section 1722(g), provide an opportunity for
review and inclusion of comments on any performance evaluation of a person serving
in an acquisition position by a person serving in an acquisition position in the same
acquisition career field. In most instances, this opportunity is inherent in the
completion of the performance evaluation by acquisition officers in the rating chain.
However, in the event neither the rater, additional rater, nor reviewer/HLR are on
acquisition-coded positions in the same acquisition position category, the ratee may
28 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
request that the performance evaluation be examined by a qualified acquisition officer
from outside the rating chain (i.e., an acquisition examiner).
1.6.8.4.2. Review by an Acquisition Examiner.
1.6.8.4.2.1. Review by an acquisition examiner is completed only when the ratee
requests a review and is filling an acquisition-coded position; and neither the rater,
additional rater nor reviewer/HLR are on a coded position in the same acquisition
position category.
1.6.8.4.2.2. (ANG only) Review by a functional/acquisitions examiner is
mandatory when there are no acquisition-coded positions, in the same acquisition
position category, in the rating chain.
1.6.8.4.3. Acquisition positions are identified on the unit manpower document and are
also identified on the evaluation notice generated when an evaluation is required.
1.6.8.4.4. The acquisition examiner must be a person in an acquisition-coded position
within the same acquisition position category as the ratee. If the management level
does not have anyone who meets the criteria herein, the management level can forward
the evaluation to the Air Staff or Space Staff functional to identify an acquisition
examiner. The minimum grade of the examiner will be:
1.6.8.4.4.1. O-6 or civilian equivalent on a critical acquisition position (for
officers).
1.6.8.4.4.2. O-4 or civilian equivalent (for enlisted).
1.6.8.4.5. The acquisition examiner accomplishes the acquisition examination after the
entire rating chain has completed the performance evaluation. (T-3)
1.6.8.4.6. (USSF Officers and DAF Enlisted only) Comments are not mandatory,
but if desired for clarification about acquisition-related considerations, the examiner
prepares a DAF Form 77 according to Table 5.1 for attachment to the enlisted
evaluation. The examiner will not change any statement or rating on the evaluation,
nor will a DAF Form 77 be used simply to include additional comments, accolades,
recommendations, etc. If used, comments are limited to five lines. (T-3)
1.6.8.4.7. (RegAF and ARC Officers only) Comments are not mandatory, but if
desired for clarification about acquisition-related considerations, the examiner prepares
them on the evaluation in myEval. The examiner will not change any statement or
rating on the evaluation, nor will their comments be used simply to include additional
comments, accolades, recommendations, etc. If provided, comments are limited to the
space available in myEval. (T-3)
1.6.9. Ratee.
1.6.9.1. The ratee is responsible for knowing the rating chain and ensuring they receive a
performance feedback assessment in accordance with Chapter 2.
1.6.9.2. For officer and enlisted evaluation responsibilities see Chapters 3 and 4.
1.6.9.3. For PRF responsibilities see Chapter 8 for RegAF and ARC and Chapter 11 for
USSF.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 29
1.6.9.4. For appeals see Chapter 10.
1.6.9.5. Ratee Review. Ratees will review their evaluation prior to signing. Ratees are
encouraged to check for typos, spelling, and inaccurate data and to bring any discrepancies
to the rater’s attention. Note: A performance feedback assessment is not required upon
completion of the evaluation. The evaluation serves as official documentation of the
feedback provided to the ratee.
1.6.10. Military Personnel Flight (MPF) and Commander’s Support Staff (CSS).
1.6.10.1. The MPF and CSS will work together in managing the Officer and Enlisted
Evaluation Systems for organizations under their purview, to include geographically
separated units. Managing includes reviewing all evaluations for administrative accuracy
and policy compliance and updating the MilPDS. (T-2)
1.6.10.2. Provide technical assistance to the commander and evaluators.
1.6.10.3. For RegAF and ARC, evaluations will be routed within myEval for digitally
signed evaluations; wet signature evaluations will be scanned and loaded into myEval for
transmittal to AFPC or ARPC. (T-1) For USSF, evaluations will be transmitted to AFPC
via the case management system (CMS).
1.6.10.4. Coordinates referral reports with appropriate work centers in the MPF to ensure
MilPDS updates are accomplished. (T-2)
1.6.10.5. MPFs will return evaluations to be re-accomplished when they do not conform
to the requirements of this instruction. (T-2)
1.6.11. Major Commands (MAJCOM)/Field Commands (FLDCOM). The management level
and their servicing personnel activity:
1.6.11.1. Designate senior rater positions and determine civilian equivalency for senior
rater designations. Note: If the vice commander is assuming commander responsibilities
and the management level wants them to have senior rater responsibilities, the management
level must appoint the vice commander senior rater responsibilities in writing.
1.6.11.2. Manage the performance evaluation program for their activity, and at their
option, quality review PRFs and return them for correction, when necessary.
1.6.11.3. Print copies of digitally signed evaluations from ARMS and PRDA.
1.6.11.4. Approve evaluators to be from a different management level than that of the ratee
in accordance with management level policy.
1.6.11.5. Appoint Air Force and Space Force advisors in writing and ensure these
individuals are current on evaluation policies and procedures.
1.6.11.6. Appoint acquisition examiners and establish officer evaluation routing
procedures when the examination cannot be accomplished within the existing rating chain.
1.6.12. Headquarters Air Force (HAF) and Headquarters Space Force (HSF).
1.6.12.1. AF/A1 approves policy regarding the Air Force Officer and Enlisted Evaluation
Systems. SF/S1 approves policy regarding the Space Force Officer and Enlisted
Evaluations Systems.
30 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
1.6.12.2. AF/A1P establishes policy on Air Force Officer and Enlisted Evaluation System
in collaboration with AF/REP and NGB/A1 and establishes an annual evaluation systems
program review to determine if improvements or changes are needed. SF/S1P establishes
policy on Space Force Officer and Enlisted Evaluations System.
1.6.12.3. (RegAF only) AF/A1 approves USAF EFDP formal board charges annually
prior to the convening of the first EFDP panel of the fiscal year.
1.6.12.4. (USSF only) SF/S1 will announce prior to each accounting date if the USSF
will utilize the EFDP process for Guardians. If utilized, SF/S1P approves the USSF EFDP
formal board charge.
1.6.13. HQ Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC).
1.6.13.1. AFPC/DP3SP implements and oversees execution of the Air Force/Space Force
Officer and Enlisted Evaluation System program. (T-1)
1.6.13.2. AFPC receives all RegAF evaluations via myEval and all USSF evaluations via
the case management system.
1.6.13.3. AFPC may review a random sampling of evaluations for compliance with policy
directives and this instruction.
1.6.13.4. AFPC forwards all USSF evaluations to ARMS and PRDA via CMS. (T-1)
1.6.14. Headquarters Air Reserve Personnel Center (ARPC).
1.6.14.1. Receives all referral evaluations for ARC members via myEval. (T-1)
1.6.14.2. Forwards all ARC referral evaluations to ARMS and PRDA. (T-1)
1.7. Rating Chain Deviations and Evaluator Changes. This paragraph does not apply to rater
changes due to PCS, PCA, separation, or retirement of the rater. (T-1)
1.7.1. Rating Chain Deviations.
1.7.1.1. The commander determines the rating chain for assigned personnel based on Air
Force or Space Force and management level policy. When necessary, commanders may
deviate from the normal (supervisory) rating chain to meet grade requirements.
Commanders may accommodate unique organizational structures and situations when
personnel are assigned to other activities outside the ratee’s assigned PAS code. The
commander of the assigned billet and the commander of the outside activity must formally
agree to rating chain deviations that include evaluators from outside the owning
organization. (T-2)
1.7.1.1.1. For officer ratees, the parent management level must approve rating chains
that involve evaluators from other management levels; however, both management
levels (the parent and the temporary management level) must formally agree to the
rating chain deviation. (T-2)
1.7.1.1.2. A rating chain deviation must be in effect for at least 12 months or longer,
for the temporary rating chain or management level to be able to sign reports. (T-2) If
there is a rating chain deviation for less than 12 months, then the parent management
level must sign all reports. (T-1)
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 31
1.7.1.1.3. Upon rating chain deviation approval, the temporary management level will
be responsible for writing the member’s officer evaluation, PRF, LOE, decoration, etc.
until the member is placed back under their parent management level. (T-1) Example:
A major is on loan from a wing to the Numbered Air Force commander to fill an
executive officer position for 12 months. Through agreement with the parent
management level and temporary management level, the parent management level can
approve a rating chain deviation. Once approved, the numbered Air Force commander
will sign the officer’s evaluation, PRF, LOE, decoration, etc.
1.7.1.1.4. It is prohibited to make rating chain deviations (such as skipping an
evaluator) solely for reasons of convenience. (T-1) Example: Do not skip a rater’s
rater who is temporarily unavailable (on leave, TDY, etc.). Do not skip a rater’s rater
for the sole purpose of affording another official in the supervisory chain (e.g., the
rater’s rater or the senior rater) the opportunity to endorse or comment in an evaluation.
1.7.1.1.5. Associate Unit. A unit which integrates members or units of one component
of the Air Force or Space Force with members or units of another component of the Air
Force or Space Force to accomplish the United States Air Force (USAF) or United
States Space Force (USSF) mission (e.g., AFR/ANG with the RegAF). In these cases,
evaluation rating chains may involve different USAF or USSF components and shall
normally be written by the member’s day-to-day supervisor with additional rater in
accordance with affected management level direction. However, evaluations must be
returned to the member's administrative control commander/reviewer/HLR/senior rater
to finalize the evaluation/endorsement. This allows for maximum operational
integration and reporting accuracy while still meeting administrative (PAS code driven)
requirements.
1.7.1.1.6. If a member is performing duty in an organization other than their assigned
PAS code, enter the assigned information, followed by “with duty at . . .” to indicate
the organization where the ratee performed duty. This includes personnel on 365-day
extended deployment billets. Example: 341st Security Forces Squadron (AFGSC),
Malmstrom AFB MT, with duty at 447 ESFS (USAFCENT), Baghdad International
Airport, Baghdad, Iraq. Note: Do not use this to enter a second organization if the
ratee is filling a dual-hatted role. (T-1) Instead, mention the dual-hatted role in the job
description or elsewhere in the evaluation.
1.7.1.2. Flight Commander/Flight Chief Rating Chains. For flight commander and flight
chief rating chains, when an officer leads a flight, the position is flight commander and is
rated by the squadron commander. When an enlisted person or civilian leads a flight, the
position is a flight chief. Applicable to both the operational and the functional
communities.
1.7.1.3. Health Professionals.
1.7.1.3.1. The wing commander will be the rater for colonel military treatment facility
(MTF) directors/market directors. (T-1) The HLR will be the first general
officer/equivalent, including selects, in the rating chain designated as a senior rater by
the management level. Note: Paragraph 1.4.12.3.2 prohibits multiple general officers
from serving as evaluators on performance evaluations. If the wing commander is a
32 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
general officer, then the wing commander will also be the HLR and serve as a single
evaluator. See paragraph 1.5.2.5.5 and paragraph 3.14.4.1.
1.7.1.3.2. The management level will be the supported MAJCOM/FLDCOM
commander. (T-1)
1.7.1.3.3. This policy applies to current and future medical units that are also defined
as MTFs and configured as wings, groups, squadrons, or flights.
1.7.1.4. Senior Defense Official/Defense Attaché (SDO/DATT) Program.
1.7.1.4.1. SDO/DATT personnel will be rated by Defense Intelligence Agency.
1.7.1.4.2. (USSF only) SDO/DATT personnel will be additional rated by their
respective combatant commands (CCMD).
1.7.1.4.3. For individuals assigned or attached to a CCMD, normal processing
procedures apply. For USSF only, the reviewer statement will read “THE RATER IS
ALSO THE REVIEWER,” and/or “THE ADDITIONAL RATER IS ALSO THE
REVIEWER.” PRFs in these cases, will be accomplished by the CCMD.
1.7.1.4.4. For USSF individuals assigned or attached to DIA, reviewer statement will
read “THE RATER IS ALSO THE REVIEWER” and/or “THE ADDITIONAL
RATER IS ALSO THE REVIEWER” and comments will still be allowed in the
additional rater block by CCMD.
1.7.1.5. (USSF only) If the grade of the home station senior rater is lower than the
deployed rater, enter the required statement “REVIEWER’S GRADE is lower than the
Previous Rater.”
1.7.1.6. Currently paragraph 1.4.12.3.2 prohibits multiple general officers from serving
as evaluators on performance evaluations. However, for members filling the MTF Director
role who are rated on by the DHA director, SDO/DATT personnel, or (USSF only) for
members filling an authorized 365-day deployment billet, multiple general officers are
authorized. For ANG only, multiple general officer endorsements are authorized when the
rater is a general officer, and the ratee has been selected for senior rater
stratification/endorsement. (T-2) When applicable, enter “TWO GENERAL OFFICERS
AUTHORIZED IAW DAFI 36-2406”.
1.7.1.6.1. Enlisted personnel at home station only (AF Form 911). Multiple general
officer endorsements are authorized when the rater is a general officer but not a senior
rater, and the ratee has been selected for senior rater stratification/endorsement. (T-2)
In such cases the rater will complete AF Form 911, Sections III through VII.
Comments are only authorized in Sections III through IV. Section VII will include the
mandatory statement “THIS SECTION NOT USED” and the applicable rater’s
signature element and signature. The senior rater will complete Section IX, to include
the applicable senior rater stratification drop-down. The officer designated as the unit
commander will complete Section VIII. (T-1)
1.7.1.7. (USSF officers and DAF Enlisted only) In cases where the rater is a general
officer (single evaluator) on an evaluation written on an individual filling an authorized
365-day deployment billet, enter the required statement “THE RATER IS ALSO THE
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 33
REVIEWER” and/or “THE ADDITIONAL RATER IS ALSO THE REVIEWER.” (T-1)
Note: This is not required for the ALQ evaluation.
1.7.1.8. General officers signing referral reports. If the senior rater is a general officer,
and is the evaluator who refers the evaluation, the referral document will be the senior
rater’s rater regardless of rank or grade. Enter the required statement “TWO GENERAL
OFFICERS AUTHORIZED IAW DAFI 36-2406”. (T-1)
1.7.2. Removal of Evaluator from Rating Chain. Evaluators are not removed from the rating
chain based solely on a rating disagreement; nor are they removed from their evaluator
responsibilities automatically. However, evaluators who are subject to a complaint of
harassment or assault are prohibited from evaluating the complainant and will be removed
from the complainant’s rating chain. (T-1) Cases involving threats of reprisal or retaliation
are serious allegations and have the potential to impede trust and readiness. Therefore,
removing an evaluator from a rating chain for either of these reasons will be at the
commander’s discretion. (T-1)
1.7.2.1. If it is determined that removal from evaluator responsibilities is necessary, the
removing official must provide written notification of the action to the evaluator being
removed, with information copies to the removed evaluator’s immediate subordinate(s)
and any other evaluators in the rating chain, through and including the senior rater. (T-1)
The evaluator being removed must acknowledge receipt within 30 calendar days from the
date, or the date of discovery, of the incident that led to the removal from evaluator
responsibilities. (T-1)
1.7.2.2. If the rater has died, is missing-in-action, captured or detained in captive status,
incapacitated, or when directed by the reviewer/senior rater (officers) or commander
(enlisted) because the rater is formally relieved from duties as an evaluator or relieved from
duty for cause:
1.7.2.2.1. For RegAF and ARC, the commander will assign a new rater to assume the
responsibilities and acquire the number of days of supervision (for AF Form 707 only).
(T-1)
1.7.2.2.2. For USSF the additional rater assumes the responsibilities and acquires the
number of days supervision (for AF Form 707 only) of the original rater. (T-1)
1.7.2.2.3. When this occurs, a statement explaining why the rater did not prepare the
evaluation must be included in the remarks section of the evaluation forms or applicable
section in myEval. (T-1)
1.7.2.2.4. Evaluations prepared by a rater under these circumstances which are not yet
a matter of record are considered working copies and may be re-accomplished. (T-1)
1.7.2.2.5. When the HLR (USAF officers and CMSgts) or additional rater (USAF
Amn-SMSgt and all USSF) has insufficient knowledge to prepare the evaluation for
the required period of supervision, they must gather knowledge of the ratee's duty
performance from all available, reliable sources (first sergeant, former supervisors).
(T-1)
34 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
1.7.2.3. In some instances, it may be more practical or desirable for another individual
who has current knowledge of the ratee to assume the rater’s responsibilities (Example:
When the additional rater is physically/geographically separated from the ratee). In this
case, the unit commander submits the request through the CSS/MPF to the senior rater for
approval. (T-3)
1.7.2.4. If a rater cannot obtain sufficient knowledge of a ratee, AFPC/DP3SP, AF/A1LO,
SF/S1L, AF/A1LE, AF/A1LG, ARPC/DPTSE, NGB/A1P, NGB/HR or NGB-GO (for
ANG general officers, including brigadier general selects, not on extended active duty)
authorizes filing an DAF Form 77 in the ratee's records stating why an evaluation could
not be prepared for the period. (T-1)
1.7.2.5. (USAF Amn-SMSgt and All USSF) The next evaluator in the rating chain (the
additional rater’s rater) assumes the responsibilities of the additional rater when the
additional rater is unable to perform evaluator duties. See paragraphs 1.7.1 and 1.7.2 for
applicable reasons. (T-1) When the additional rater’s rater is also the reviewer/final
evaluator, they complete the additional rater’s comments section and reviewer/final
evaluator’s comments of the applicable form and closes the evaluation. (T-1)
1.7.2.6. (RegAF and ARC Officers only) The next evaluator in the rating chain (the
HLR’s rater) assumes the responsibilities of the HLR when the HLR is unable to perform
evaluator duties. (T-1) See paragraphs 1.7.1 and 1.7.2 for applicable reasons.
1.8. Evaluator’s Mandatory Considerations.
1.8.1. Convictions. Any conviction for a violation of criminal law of the U.S. or of any other
country must be reported, in writing, by all officers and enlisted members. (T-1) For RegAF,
USSF, and ARC members in active status, members will report a conviction to their rater
within 15 days of the date of the conviction. For ARC members not in active status, members
will report the conviction to their wing commander/equivalent at the first drill period or within
30 calendar days of the date of the conviction, whichever is earlier. For Individual Ready
Reserve, members will report the conviction to the Air Reserve Personnel Center (ARPC)
within 30 calendar days of the date of the conviction. (T-0) See FY2006 National Defense
Authorization Act and Public Law 109-163, §554, 119 Stat. 3136, 3264-65.
1.8.1.1. For purposes of this policy, the term “conviction” includes a plea or finding of
guilty, a plea of nolo contendere (no contest), and all other actions tantamount to a finding
of guilty, including adjudication withheld, deferred prosecution, entry into adult or juvenile
pretrial intervention programs, and any similar disposition of charges.
1.8.1.2. For purposes of this policy, a criminal law of the U.S. includes any military,
federal, state, district, commonwealth, territory/equivalent, county, parish, municipality,
city, township, local subdivision, or foreign criminal law or ordinance.
1.8.2. Sex-related Offenses. Document substantiated offenses in the permanent record. (T-1)
This includes any substantiated allegation of a sex-related offense that results in conviction by
court-martial, nonjudicial punishment, or other punitive administrative action (e.g., letter of
reprimand). Documenting sex-related offenses in an evaluation does not limit or prohibit the
Airman or Guardian from challenging the placement or appealing for removal.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 35
1.8.3. Equal Opportunity and Treatment. Unlawful discrimination and sexual harassment
violate the very premise of what it means to be an Airman/Guardian. Evaluators must ensure
compliance with DoD and Department of the Air Force directives prohibiting such behavior
and document deviations on evaluations as prescribed in DAFI 36-2710, Equal Opportunity
Program. (T-0)
1.8.4. Prohibited Activities. Airmen and Guardians are prohibited from actively advocating
supremacist, extremist, or criminal gang doctrine, ideology, or causes, including those that
advance, encourage, or advocate illegal discrimination or deprive others of their civil rights.
Such behavior is incompatible with military service. Evaluators must consider a ratee’s
membership in these types of groups and document prohibited activity by the ratee as
prescribed in AFI 51-508, Political Activities, Free Speech and Freedom of Assembly of Air
Force Personnel.
1.8.5. Occupational Safety and Health. Consider how commanders, managers, and
supervisors discharge their responsibilities under the Air Force Occupational and
Environmental Safety, Fire Protection, and Health Program.
1.8.6. Security of Classified Information. Consider how well ratees who handle or have access
to classified information discharge security responsibilities. When appropriate, comment on
any action, behavior, or condition that is reportable under security regulations.
1.8.7. When to Document.
1.8.7.1. If a member has been convicted by a court-martial or received an Article 15 (Note:
applicable to both officers and enlisted) or if the senior rater decides to file adverse
information in a member’s officer selection record, comments relating to the ratee’s
behavior are mandatory on the next officer or enlisted evaluation or TR, and (RegAF and
ARC only) PRF, if not already documented. (T-1) The evaluation becomes a referral.
Comments are also required on members who have been convicted of a reportable civilian
offense that: 1) is a sexual offense that is the same as, or closely related to, sex-related
offenses punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), or attempts to
commit any of those offenses, 2) carries a possible sentence of confinement for more than
one year or death, or 3) results in a sentence that includes unsuspended confinement. (T-1)
For further guidance, supervisors and commanders will contact an attorney in the servicing
Office of the Staff Judge Advocate. (T-2)
1.8.7.2. A rater is not required to comment on a conviction in a current report if the
misconduct or event that ultimately resulted in a conviction was addressed on a previous
evaluation. (T-1) For example, if a member is arrested and charged with driving under the
influence (DUI) by off-base officials who decline to waive jurisdiction, and the member
ultimately receives a letter of reprimand that is commented on in the next evaluation, but
later (different reporting period), the downtown prosecution results in a conviction, then
the rater is not required to comment on the DUI conviction because the underlying
misconduct that led to the conviction was addressed in a previous evaluation.
36 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
1.8.8. Waiver Requests.
1.8.8.1. In extraordinary cases, raters may request a waiver of the mandatory requirement
to document civilian convictions for good cause. The waiver request will route from the
rater, through any required additional rater and the ratee’s commander, to the ratee’s senior
rater. The senior rater may either deny the request or endorse and forward to the
MAJCOM/CC or FLDCOM/CC. In the case of reports within Air Force District of
Washington (AFDW), United States Air Force Academy, or any Direct Reporting Unit of
AFDW or Field Operating Agency reporting to an activity on the Air Staff, requests will
be forwarded to the Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force (VCSAF) or Vice Chief of staff
of Space Operations (VCSO). For the Air National Guard, requests will be forwarded to
the Director, Air National Guard (DANG).
1.8.8.2. If the senior rater denies the waiver request, the decision is final and may not be
appealed or considered further. (T-1) This does not prevent an individual from challenging
any completed report in any other appropriate forums, e.g., ERAB or the AFBCMR.
1.8.8.3. When the senior rater endorses the waiver request, they will then forward it to the
MAJCOM/CC, FLDCOM/CC, VCSAF, VCSO, or DANG for decision. The final approval
authority will either approve or deny the request. (T-1)
1.8.8.3.1. The MAJCOM/CC or FLDCOM/CC may delegate to the MAJCOM/CV or
FLDCOM/CV, or, in the case of the AF/CV or SF/CV, to the AF/CVA or SF/DS. No
further delegation beyond an Adjutant General, or equivalent, is authorized for the
ANG. The decision of the approval authority is the final decision for such waiver
requests and may not be appealed or considered further. This does not prevent an
individual from challenging any completed report in any other appropriate forums, e.g.,
ERAB or the AFBCMR.
1.8.8.3.2. In order to approve any waiver requests, the approval authority must issue a
written finding that the mandatory comments for the specific criminal conviction are
not in the best interests of the Air Force/Space Force and that the inclusion of any such
comments would unduly harm the ratee. Upon final decision, forward the waiver
documentation to AFPC/DPMSPE and the AFPC Military Records Section
(AFPC/DP1ORM) via email. Written waiver approvals will be filed in the member’s
Master Personnel Records Group for the sole purpose of documenting the final
approval. (T-1)
1.8.9. Organizational Climate.
1.8.9.1. Organizational climate is defined as the way in which members in a unit perceive
and characterize their unit environment. All Airmen and Guardians are responsible for
creating an organizational climate in which every member is treated with dignity and
respect, and one that does not tolerate unlawful discrimination, sexual harassment, or
sexual assault in any form. NCOs and officers are not only responsible for creating this
environment but are also accountable for it. NCOs and officers will build a healthy
organizational climate by: communicating clear direction at all levels of supervision;
adhering to and enforcing standards; not tolerating and, when necessary, appropriately
responding to any form of sexual harassment, sexual assault, hazing, unlawful
discrimination, or any other conduct harmful to the good order and discipline of the unit;
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 37
being accountable for their actions; and cultivating an environment where teamwork, unity
and cohesiveness are the standard practice. (T-0)
1.8.9.2. Commanders at every level have an even greater responsibility to create a healthy
climate in their command. Additionally, they are responsible for ensuring adherence to
Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) Program directives. Command climate,
just like organizational climate, is the perception of a unit’s environment by its members.
Commanders are ultimately responsible for the good order and discipline in their unit and
have unique responsibility and authority to ensure good order and discipline. Therefore,
evaluators must take this special responsibility and authority into consideration when
evaluating a commander’s effectiveness in ensuring a healthy command climate. (T-0) A
commander’s evaluation shall require a statement regarding whether the commander has
conducted the required command climate assessments and provided the results with
remedy plan to the rater. A commander’s evaluation shall also indicate the extent to which
the commanding officer has or has not established a command climate in which:
1.8.9.2.1. Allegations of sexual assault are properly managed and fairly evaluated.
(T-0)
1.8.9.2.2. A victim of criminal activity, including sexual assault, can report criminal
activity without fear of retaliation, including ostracism and group pressure from other
members of the command. (T-0)
1.8.9.3. All evaluators will assess their ratee(s) on what the member did to ensure a healthy
organizational climate. (T-0)
1.8.9.4. A commander’s evaluation will require a mandatory statement stating that the
supervisor received the commander’s annual climate assessment results and conducted the
appropriate review and/or took the appropriate accountability measures with the
subordinate commander after reviewing the results. (T-1) (USSF only) Place the
mandatory statement in section IV or section V (if authorized, see Table 3.1) of the AF
Form 707.
1.8.10. Command Oversight of Housing. The installation/wing, space base delta, or delta
commander, installation/wing, or delta command chief, mission support group (MSG)
commander (MSG/CC) (or equivalent), MSG senior enlisted leader (SEL) (or equivalent), civil
engineer squadron (CES) commander (CES/CC), CES SEL, and military installation housing
manager (as applicable) will be evaluated and assessed on the extent to which these individuals
have or have not exercised effective oversight and leadership in the following:
1.8.10.1. Improving conditions of military privatized housing. (T-0)
1.8.10.2. Addressing concerns of members of the Armed Forces and their families who
reside in military privatized housing on the installation. (T-0)
1.8.10.3. (USSF only) place the mandatory statement in section IV or section V (if
authorized, see Table 3.1) of the AF Form 707.
1.9. Disagreements.
1.9.1. A disagreement is when a subsequent evaluator nonconcurs with or makes any
statement that indicates obvious difference with a previous evaluator. Disagreements are a
difference in perspective and should not be viewed negatively. When disagreements occur,
38 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
they must be explained. On “wet signature” evaluations, the subsequent rater marks the non-
concur block and initials the rating block that corresponds with their rating and/or provides
specific comments to explain the disagreement. Digitally signed forms do not allow an
evaluator to initial in a different rating block; therefore, the evaluator who disagrees must
specifically state the performance factor in disagreement, the reason for the disagreement and
their rating. (T-1)
1.9.2. Comments to support disagreements are required. (T-1) Example: Disagree with
rater’s assessment of Job Knowledge—TSgt Smith was unable to provide correct operating
procedures during monthly evaluation; or Capt Rogers was unable to answer critical questions
concerning the operation of his flight leading to an Operational Readiness Inspection rating of
“Unsatisfactory” for his squadron.
1.9.3. Evaluators should discuss disagreements when preparing evaluations. Evaluators are
first given an opportunity to justify their rating/comment; however, they will not do so just to
satisfy the disagreement. For USAF Amn-SMSgt and all USSF members, if, after discussion,
the disagreement remains, the evaluator who non-concurs should limit the comments to the
space provided but can attach a DAF Form 77 if more space is required. For RegAF and ARC
officers, if, after discussion, the disagreement remains, the evaluator who non-concurs should
limit the comments to the space provided but can add comments to an additional comment
section which will appear on a second page of the evaluation. The additional comment section
will not to be used to add additional performance information.
1.9.4. If the forced distributor/unit commander/military or civilian director/other authorized
reviewer is junior in grade to the rater/additional rater/HLR/Reviewer/Final Evaluator, they
must discuss any non-concurrence with the rater/additional rater/HLR/reviewer/final evaluator
prior to signing the evaluation.
1.9.5. Updating the Personnel Data System. When an evaluation contains different overall
ratings, the final reviewer/evaluator’s rating will be updated in the personnel data system. For
example, on the DAF Form 910, if the additional rater disagrees with and changes the rater’s
overall rating, and the commander concurs with the change, the additional rater’s rating will
be updated. However, if the commander concurs with the rater’s rating, the rater’s rating will
be updated.
1.10. Referral Evaluations.
1.10.1. Purpose. Referral procedures are established to allow the ratee due process by giving
the ratee an opportunity to respond and/or rebut any negative ratings or comments before it
becomes a matter of record. Additionally, it allows evaluators to consider all the facts,
including any they may not have been aware of, prior to the evaluation becoming a matter of
record.
1.10.2. General Information.
1.10.2.1. Vague Comments. Do not make vague comments about the member’s behavior
or performance. Example: "Due to a recent off-duty incident, Lt Jackson's potential is
limited" does not state what occurred. Vague comments do not fully explain the incident
or behavior, nor do they justify the referral. When doubt arises as to whether a comment
is a referral comment or not, refer the evaluation. This will afford the member an
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 39
opportunity to respond. It is better to afford the ratee the due process now while all
evaluators are available, than to try and refer it later if directed by the ERAB or AFBCMR.
1.10.2.2. Any evaluator whose ratings or comments causes an evaluation to become a
referral evaluation must give the ratee the opportunity to comment on the evaluation. (T-1)
1.10.2.3. A referral evaluation can be detrimental to an Airman’s or Guardian’s career;
therefore, face-to-face interaction is required between the rater and ratee.
1.10.2.4. An evaluation will be referred more than once when a subsequent evaluator gives
additional referral ratings or comments. (T-1) Note: Comments regarding the same
incident or behavior will not require the evaluation to be referred more than once.
1.10.2.5. If, after the evaluation has been referred to the ratee, updates are made to the
evaluation that add information or change the content (excluding administrative corrections
such as spelling or punctuation), the ratee must be given an opportunity to respond to the
updates. (T-1) Refer the evaluation again and allow 3 duty days for a response (30 calendar
days for non-extended active duty). (T-1) The date of the new referral memo must be on
or after the date the updated evaluation is signed. The ratee can submit a new rebuttal or
attach the previously submitted rebuttal.
1.10.2.6. Although an evaluation may be referred several times during processing, any one
evaluator will not normally refer the evaluation more than once. However, this does not
include evaluations referred again in accordance with paragraph 1.10.4.4 and paragraph
1.10.4.5.
1.10.2.7. Ensure the name of the next evaluator is included on the evaluation or in the
referral memorandum (Figure 1.1) when referral procedures are not included on the form
itself.
1.10.2.8. For USAF Amn-SMSgt and all USSF members, the evaluator who refers the
evaluation and any subsequent evaluators may continue comments on the DAF Form 77 to
explain non-concurrence or the behavior that led to the referral. (T-1) Comments are
limited to the space on the front of the form (Section IV). Each evaluator will use a separate
form. For RegAF and ARC officers, the evaluator who refers the evaluation and any
subsequent evaluators may continue comments in an additional comment section within
myEval, to explain non-concurrence or the behavior that led to the referral. (T-1)
Comments are limited to the space provided in myEval. Each evaluator will complete a
separate comment section.
1.10.2.9. All original documents will remain attached to the original evaluation. (T-1)
1.10.2.10. In organizations where the rating chain crosses MAJCOM/FLDCOM lines (for
instance, when there is a “dual-hatted” senior rater), the evaluator named in the referral
document (referral reviewer) is next official in the chain of command from the
MAJCOM/FLDCOM that controls the ratee’s organization of assignment, even if the
senior rater’s rater belongs to the other MAJCOM/FLDCOM.
1.10.2.11. Airmen or Guardians whose most recent or final PCS performance evaluation
is or will be a referral are ineligible for PCS unless the commander submits a request to the
MPF to change the assignment availability code. Requests to update the assignment
40 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
availability code can be made any time after 120 calendar days have passed since the close
out of the evaluation.
1.10.3. When to Refer a Performance Evaluation. Performance evaluations must be referred
when:
1.10.3.1. Comments in any officer or enlisted evaluation, LOE, or TR (to include
attachments), regardless of the ratings, that are derogatory in nature, imply or refer to
behavior incompatible with or not meeting AF/SF standards, and/or refer to disciplinary
actions. (T-1) When considering the Airman’s or Guardian’s ability to meet standards,
consider unacceptable performance as actions that are incompatible with, and/or Airmen
or Guardians who have routinely (a repeated inability to meet standards that would render
the aggregated performance assessment over the entire reporting period as below AF/SF
standards and expectations) and/or significantly (a single instance where failure to meet
standards is either egregious in nature or so far short of a standard that it impacts overall
aggregated performance assessment) failed to adhere to established AF/SF standards and
expectations. (T-1)
1.10.3.2. When an officer fails to meet standards in any one of the listed performance
factors, in Section III or Section IX of the AF Form 707, the overall evaluation will be a
“Does Not Meet Standards” and must be referred. Note: If the evaluation is marked
“Does Not Meet Standards,” there must be a comment pertaining to the behavior in the
referring evaluator’s assessment block. Comments in the referral memorandum do not
meet this requirement. (T-1)
1.10.3.3. An evaluator marks “Does Not Meet Standards” in Section III of AF Form 707
or “Do Not Retain” in Section IV of AF Form 912. (T-1)
1.10.4. Who Refers a Performance Evaluation?
1.10.4.1. Any evaluator whose rating(s) or comment(s) causes the evaluation to be a
referral will refer the evaluation to the ratee. (T-1)
1.10.4.2. If a previous evaluator did not refer an evaluation and a subsequent evaluator
determines the evaluation should be referred, return the evaluation to the previous evaluator
and discuss the rating and/or comment. The previous evaluator may change the rating
and/or comment or the subsequent evaluator may refer the evaluation. (T-1)
1.10.4.3. If there is a disagreement as to whether or not to refer an evaluation, the
additional evaluator may refer the evaluation.
1.10.4.4. (USAF Amn-SMSgt and all USSF Members) In cases where the referring
evaluator is a MAJCOM/FLDCOM, or unified commander, the evaluator named in the
referral document will be the Vice Chief of Staff of the Air Force or Vice Chief of Space
Operations (SF/VCSO) who will sign an DAF Form 77. (T-1) However, in situations
where the rater is a senior rater who has caused the evaluation to be referred and there is
an existing evaluator within the rater’s organizational chain (to include
MAJCOM/FLDCOM), forward the evaluation to that evaluator for appropriate action. See
paragraph 1.7.
1.10.4.5. (USAF Amn-SMSgt and all USSF enlisted) On enlisted evaluations, when the
additional rater refers the evaluation, the forced distributor or unit
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 41
commander/director/other authorized reviewer is the individual named in the referral
document who will review the ratee’s comments. (T-1) The forced distributor or unit
commander/director/ other authorized reviewer completes their review and may place
additional comments on an DAF Form 77.
1.10.4.6. When the forced distributor or unit commander/military or civilian director/other
authorized reviewer refers the evaluation, the forced distributor or unit commander/military
or civilian/other authorized reviewer’s rater is the individual named in the referral
document. (T-1)
1.10.5. Responsibilities.
1.10.5.1. The Referring Evaluator Responsibilities.
1.10.5.1.1. Prepares the referral document in accordance with Figure 1.1., Table 4.9.,
Table 4.10 and Table 4.12 (Enlisted), Table 3.1 (USSF Officers), Table 3.6 (RegAF
and ARC officers), paragraph 1.10.6.4 (Training Reports) or Table 5.1 (Letter of
Evaluation), whichever is applicable. Note: The date the rater signs the evaluation,
and the date of the referral memorandum must be the same date.
1.10.5.1.2. On or after the close-out date of the evaluation, deliver the referral
memorandum to the ratee, discuss the content of the memorandum with the ratee,
provide counseling (if needed), and obtain the ratee’s signature and the date
acknowledging receipt. (T-1) After the ratee signs the memorandum, provide a copy
to the ratee and forward the original to the evaluator named in the referral document.
Do not include subsequent evaluator comments on the referral evaluation until after the
rebuttal is received or rebuttal period has passed. (T-1)
1.10.5.1.3. For USAF Amn-SMSgt and all USSF members, if the ratee is
geographically separated (including those who have passed their date of separation),
send a copy of the referral document to the evaluator named in the referral document
and mail the original referral document to the ratee by “certified mail - return receipt
requested.” (T-3) For RegAF and ARC officers, if the ratee is geographically
separated, send the referral memorandum electronically. For those who have passed
their date of separation, send a copy of the referral document to the evaluator named in
the referral document and mail the original referral document to the ratee by “certified
mail - return receipt requested.” (T-3)
1.10.5.1.4. Upon receipt of the evaluation, provide feedback to the ratee and obtain the
ratee’s signature. Next, forward the evaluation to the ratee’s servicing MPF.
1.10.5.2. Ratee Responsibilities.
1.10.5.2.1. The ratee acknowledges receipt of the referral memorandum by signing and
dating. (T-1) The signature only acknowledges and verifies receipt of the referral
memorandum on the date indicated; it does not signify concurrence with the evaluation
or indicate whether or not the ratee will provide rebuttal remarks.
1.10.5.2.2. If the ratee is geographically separated, they will sign the referral
memorandum to acknowledge receipt and then forward the original to the evaluator
named in the referral memorandum. (T-1)
42 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
1.10.5.2.3. The ratee will provide rebuttal comments to the referral reviewer within 3
duty days (30 calendar days for non-extended active duty) from the date of receipt (if
mailed from the date of delivery), regardless of if the ratee is still on active duty. (T-1)
The ratee will upload (RegAF and ARC officers only) or deliver the referral documents
with all attachments. The ratee may use certified or registered mail if geographically
separated. (T-1) The ratee may request more time from the evaluator named in the
referral document not to exceed 45 calendar days from acknowledgement. (T-1)
Additionally, the ratee:
1.10.5.2.3.1. May ask the area Defense Counsel or local personnel advisor to
provide guidance/assistance in preparing rebuttal comments.
1.10.5.2.3.2. Must limit comments, including any pertinent attachments, to a total
of 10 single-sided pages or 5 double-sided pages. (T-1) These will not reflect on
the character, conduct, integrity, or motives of an evaluator unless fully
substantiated and documented. All pertinent attachments become part of the
evaluation filed in the personnel record; however, items that are already part of the
permanent record, such as copies of previous evaluations, will be removed from the
referral package prior to filing. (T-1)
1.10.5.2.3.3. May have another individual prepare comments on their behalf (such
as an attorney). However, when this is done, the ratee must include a statement
confirming the document is to be considered as the ratee’s response. (T-1) This
statement will appear somewhere on the rebuttal document or be attached as a
separate statement. (T-1) Note: If the ratee’s statement is provided as a separate
attachment, it will be considered part of the 10-page restriction. (Example: If the
attorney submits 5 pages, the ratee can submit 5; if the attorney submits 9 pages,
then the ratee can only submit 1 page and vice versa).
1.10.5.2.4. May choose not to comment on the referral evaluation. Once the time limit
has elapsed, the evaluator named in the referral document (referral reviewer) completes
the evaluation and continues normal processing (see paragraph 1.10.5.3.). Failure to
provide comments does not prevent the ratee from later appealing the evaluation in
accordance with the procedures in Chapter 10 once the evaluation becomes a matter
of record.
1.10.5.3. The Referral Reviewer. (The Evaluator Named in the Referral Document.)
1.10.5.3.1. Must allow the ratee 3 duty days (30 calendar days for non-extended active
duty) to submit a rebuttal. (T-1) If the ratee needs additional time, e.g., due to the non-
availability of an Area Defense Counsel or the referral reviewer has returned the
rebuttal because it is more than 10 pages, the referral reviewer may grant an extension.
However, the referral reviewer will not review the evaluation until the 3 duty days (30
calendar days for non-extended active members) have passed, even if the ratee has
indicated that they will not submit comments. (T-1)
1.10.5.3.2. After 3 duty days (30 calendar days for non-extended active duty) have
passed, the referral reviewer will:
1.10.5.3.2.1. Review and consider the ratee’s comments, if provided.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 43
1.10.5.3.2.2. Place the applicable mandatory statement in the evaluator’s comment
block of the appropriate evaluation.
1.10.5.3.2.2.1. If the ratee provided comments, enter the statement: "I have
carefully considered (ratee's name) comments to the referral document of
(date)." Ensure this date is the date of the referral memorandum, not the
evaluation close-out date or the date of the ratee’s rebuttal. Subsequent
evaluators do not enter this statement.
1.10.5.3.2.2.2. If the ratee does not forward comments within 3 duty days (30
calendar days for non-extended active duty) (plus mailing time and any
approved extensions), prepare an endorsement to the evaluation and include the
statement: "Comments from the ratee were requested but were not received
within the required period." (T-1) Then forward the evaluation for normal
processing.
1.10.5.3.3. Forward the evaluation with all attachments to the next evaluator. If the
referral reviewer is the final evaluator, forward the evaluation to the rater so the rater
can provide feedback and obtain the ratee’s acknowledgement of the completed
evaluation.
1.10.5.4. Additional/Subsequent Evaluators.
1.10.5.4.1. Send the evaluation to the next evaluator in the rating chain for additional
endorsement when an endorser is senior to the commander or when a commander who
is senior to the endorser refers the evaluation. See paragraphs 1.10.4.4 and 1.10.4.5.
1.10.5.4.2. For USAF Amn-SMSgt and all USSF members, prepare the endorsement
on DAF Form 77. For RegAF and ARC officers, prepare an endorsement in the referral
comment section provided on the evaluation.
1.10.5.4.3. For USAF Amn-SMSgt and all USSF members, check the “supplemental
sheet” block on DAF Form 77, Section IIA and enter appropriate comments in Section
IV.
1.10.5.4.4. For RegAF and ARC, if the evaluator on the DAF Form 77 or in the referral
comments section is not an Air Force officer or Air Force NCO obtain an Air Force
Advisor review. For USSF, if the evaluator on the DAF Form 77 or in the referral
comments section is not a Space Force officer or Space Force NCO, obtain a Space
Force advisor review.
1.10.5.4.5. An additional rater or final evaluator/reviewer who decides to refer an
evaluation due to a performance assessment rating or comment made by a previous
evaluator refers it to the ratee before completing their portion of the evaluation. The
referral document will instruct the ratee to direct and return any rebuttal comments back
to them. (T-1) Upon receipt of the ratee’s rebuttal, or when 3 duty days (30 calendar
days for non-extended active duty) have elapsed, the evaluator completes their portion
of the evaluation.
1.10.5.4.6. If, after referral, a subsequent evaluator upgrades the ratings and/or
invalidates the referral comments so the conditions defined in paragraph 1.10.3 no
longer apply, the non-concur block is marked, and comments are made in support of
44 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
the disagreement in the ratings or comments. The evaluation is no longer considered
referral; however, retain all original referral documents and/or correspondence with the
evaluation.
1.10.5.4.7. If, after referral, a subsequent evaluator upgrades ratings or comments but
the conditions defined in paragraph 1.10.3 still exist, the non-concur block is marked,
and comments are made in support of the disagreement in the ratings or comments.
The evaluation remains a referral. Retain original referral correspondence with the
evaluation.
1.10.5.4.8. When the last evaluator on the evaluation has caused the evaluation to be
referred, the next evaluator in the rating chain (as named in the referral document) will,
upon receipt of the ratee’s comments, prepare an endorsement to the evaluation on an
DAF Form 77 if no comment area exists on the applicable evaluation form. If the
evaluator named in the referral document does not concur with the comments or ratings
of the previous evaluator, their endorsement will, in addition to the mandatory referral
comments, describe the disagreement (on the first line in the comments area on the
applicable evaluation or may continue comments on an DAF Form 77).
1.10.5.5. Deployed Evaluators. If the referring evaluator is deployed and is referring a
home station evaluation, the referring evaluator will sign the referral memorandum and
officer or enlisted evaluation and forward the evaluation and referral documents to the next
evaluator in the rating chain. The next evaluator in the chain (the referral reviewer) will
act on behalf of the referring evaluator who is deployed and issue the evaluation and
referral documents to the ratee. Upon receipt of the ratee’s comments, or at the expiration
of the ratee’s 3-duty-day-window (30 calendar days for non-extended active duty) to
respond, the referral reviewer processes the evaluation and all referral documents in
accordance with paragraph 1.10.5.3.
1.10.6. Referral Procedures.
1.10.6.1. Referral Officer Evaluations. The referring evaluator will use the referral section
of the evaluation and can fill in the specifics in the blank lines provided. For USSF officers,
if the specific details are too long for the space allotted, the referring evaluator can attach
a separate DAF Form 77 (see paragraph 1.10.2.8) and annotate “See Attachment” in the
lines provided in this block. Refer to Table 3.1 for procedures on preparing the AF Form
707 and Table 3.5 for procedures on preparing the officer ALQ evaluation.
1.10.6.2. Referral EPRs or Education/Training Reports. Prepare a referral memorandum
(DAF Forms 910/911 only) in accordance with Figure 1.1. All evaluators and reviewers
must wet sign and date. (T-1)
1.10.6.3. Referral Letter of Evaluation. The referral process is accomplished on the form
itself.
1.10.6.3.1. Deployed Commander Letter of Evaluation. Complete an DAF Form 77
in accordance with Table 5.1 and paragraph 5.2.1.2.1.
1.10.6.3.2. All Other Letters of Evaluation.
1.10.6.3.2.1. Designated Rater (Officer Only). If a LOE prepared by the officially
designated rater contains referral comments, the rater prepares an officer evaluation
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 45
in accordance with paragraph 1.10.6.1. The reason for the evaluation will be
DBH. At least 60-calendar days of supervision is required, unless the waiver
authority extends the requirement.
1.10.6.3.2.2. Other than Designated Rater. Complete Sections I, II, IV, V and VII
in accordance with Table 5.1. The referral process itself is not accomplished on
the DAF Form 77. Exception: Deployed Commander Letters of Evaluation. If
someone other than the officially designated rater prepares a LOE with referral
comments, forward the letter along with any rebuttal comments the ratee may want
to add to the officially designated rater. (T-1) The rater will review the documents
and decide whether or not permanent recording is warranted. If so, the letter of
evaluation becomes a referral document attached to the evaluation. If the rater
decides not to permanently record, they will return the LOE and any rebuttal
comments to the ratee.
1.10.6.4. Referral Training Report (TR) (AF Form 475). Refer the TR to the ratee using
the same procedures outlined in paragraphs 1.10.6.1 and 1.10.6.2. Name the commander
of the Department of the Air Force school or unit of assignment as the next evaluator
(determined by which organization is preparing the TR). The evaluator reviews the ratee’s
comments, if provided; adds the applicable mandatory comments in accordance with
paragraphs 1.10.5.3.2.2.1 or 1.10.5.3.2.2.2; and endorses the TR on an DAF Form 77 using
the first evaluator’s block.
1.11. Mandatory Comments. Specific comments or entries mandated by this DAF instruction
are identified by the instruction to “enter” or “include the statement” followed by the specific
comment placed within quotation marks and must be documented in myEval and/or on the
evaluation as stated.
1.11.1. Referral Reviewer. For a referral LOE, officer or enlisted evaluation, or TR, the
evaluator named in the referral document must comment as required by paragraph
1.10.5.3.2.2.
1.11.2. If the rater died, became incapacitated, or was relieved from duties as an evaluator,
state the reason in the feedback sections of the officer evaluation (see paragraph 1.7.2.2) or
in the remarks section of the enlisted evaluation. (T-1)
1.11.3. If a member has been convicted by a court-martial, comments relating to the ratee’s
behavior are mandatory on the ratee’s next officer or enlisted evaluation, TR or (RegAF and
ARC only) PRF. Additionally, comments on individuals who have been found guilty, pled
guilty or nolo contendere (no contest) of a reportable civilian offense are mandatory (see
paragraph 1.8.1.2.).
1.11.4. If performance feedback was not accomplished, state the reason why it was not
accomplished. Rationale must be placed in myEval when completing ALQ evaluations and
the “Remarks Section” on forms 707, 910, 911, and 912. (T-1) The reason must be honest,
plausible, and specific, such as “Midterm feedback assessment not conducted due to only 58
calendar days supervision between initial feedback assessment and the evaluation close-out
date,” or “Rater was unable to conduct feedback assessment (state specific reason).” Non-
receipt of a feedback notice and “administrative oversight” are not acceptable reasons.
46 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
1.11.5. If a member has been assigned to serve as a voting assistance officer, a comment
relating to the performance of the member in these duties is required. (T-0) See 10 U.S.C. §
1566.
1.12. General Prohibited Evaluator Considerations and Comments. Certain items are
prohibited for consideration and will not be commented upon on any officer evaluation system or
enlisted evaluation system form/brief. Except as authorized in this instruction, do not consider,
refer to, or include comments regarding:
1.12.1. Sensitive Information.
1.12.1.1. Classified Information. Do not enter classified information in any section of the
form. (T-1)
1.12.1.2. Confidential Statements. Confidential statements, testimony, or data obtained
by, or presented to, boards under DAFI 91-204, Safety Investigations and Reports.
1.12.1.3. Appeal Agencies Outside Rating Chain. Actions taken by an individual outside
the normal chain of command that represent guaranteed rights of appeal. Example:
Inspector general, AFBCMR, equal opportunity and treatment/military equal opportunity
complaints, congressional inquiries.
1.12.1.4. Drug or Alcohol Abuse Rehabilitation Programs. Focus on the behavior,
conduct, or performance resulting from alcohol or drug use versus the actual consumption
of alcohol or drugs or participation in a rehabilitation program. Only competent medical
authorities can diagnose alcoholism or drug addiction, and the diagnosis is prohibited on
evaluations.
1.12.1.5. Temporary or Permanent Disqualification under DoDM5210.42_AFMAN 13-
501, Nuclear Weapons Personnel Reliability Program (PRP). The behavior of the ratee
that resulted in the action may be referenced; however, it may not be mentioned that the
ratee was disqualified.
1.12.1.6. Medical Information. Only authorized medical officials are in a position to make
comments on medical conditions. Evaluators must focus evaluation comments on the
behavior and duty performance of the individual. Comments pertaining to the medical
condition, treatment, or diagnosis are prohibited.
1.12.2. Potential Discriminatory Factors and/or Information.
1.12.2.1. Race, Ethnic Origin, Gender, Age, Religion, Sexual Orientation or Political
Affiliation of the Ratee. Do not refer to these items in such a way that others could interpret
the comments as reflecting favorably or unfavorably on the person. This is not meant to
prohibit evaluators from commenting on involvement in cultural or church activities, but
cautions against the use of specific religious denominations, etc. Example: “Capt Doe is
the first female pilot ever selected for training in the F-16”, is an inappropriate reference
to gender. Pronouns reflecting gender (e.g., he, she, him, her, his, they, their, etc.) may be
used. “Wing Point of Contact for African American Heritage Committee” or “Arranged a
blood drive at the Baptist Memorial Hospital” are acceptable comments.
1.12.2.2. Family Activities or Marital Status. Do not consider or include information
(either positive or negative) regarding the member’s marital status or the employment,
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 47
education, or volunteer service activities (on or off the military installation) of the
member's family. (T-1)
1.12.2.3. Officer/Enlisted Club Membership. Comments regarding a ratee’s club
membership is prohibited. (T-1)
1.12.2.4. Court-Martial Panel Membership. Do not consider performance as a member of
a court-martial panel or render a less than favorable evaluation because of the zeal in which
the ratee served as a defense or respondent's counsel (see Article 37, UCMJ). (T-1) This
is not intended to inhibit an accurate portrayal of a counsel's competence in the
representation of clients.
1.12.3. Duty History or Performance Outside the Reporting Period.
1.12.3.1. Do not comment on duty history or performance outside the current reporting
period, except as permitted by paragraphs 1.12.3.3 and 1.12.3.4. (T-1).
1.12.3.2. Previous Evaluations or Ratings. Comments from previous evaluations or
ratings are prohibited (e.g., do not include comments from an AF Form 475 on an officer
ALQ evaluation or AF Form 707; or comments from a deployed commander LOE on an
officer ALQ evaluation or AF Form 707, except in conjunction with performance feedback
sessions and as outlined in Chapter 8 for promotion recommendation forms. (T-1) Note:
Evaluators may review previous evaluations to prevent repeating prior accomplishments
and making inappropriate recommendations.
1.12.3.3. Prior Events. Events that occurred in a previous reporting period that add
significantly to the evaluation, were not known to and considered by the previous
evaluators and were not already reflected in a previous evaluation in the permanent record
(this includes officer and enlisted evaluations, LOEs, and TRs) can be included in a
subsequent evaluation. (T-1) Example: An event (positive or negative) which came to
light after an evaluation became a matter of record, but which occurred during the period
of that evaluation, could be mentioned in the ratee’s next evaluation because the incident
was not previously reported. In rare cases, serious offenses (such as those punishable by
courts-martial) may not come to light or be substantiated for several years. In such cases,
inclusion of that information may be appropriate even though the incident and/or behavior
occurred prior to the last reporting period. Additionally, negative incidents from previous
reporting periods involving the character, conduct, or integrity of the ratee that continue to
influence the performance or utilization of the ratee may be commented upon in that
context only. Commanders and senior raters make the determination of what constitutes a
significant addition. If a commander has considered and decided not to comment on a
known adverse action, an incumbent commander may not overturn a previous
commander’s decision by requesting the adverse action be added after the evaluation has
been made a matter of record, nor may the incumbent commander include it in the next
evaluation. (T-1) However, if the behavior has continued into the next rating period, an
evaluator may comment on the specific behavior for that rating period.
1.12.3.4. (USSF officers only) Events That Occur After the Close-Out Date. If an
incident or event occurs between the time an evaluation closes out and when it becomes a
matter of record that warrants inclusion in that evaluation, the commander may request an
extension of the close-out date (see paragraph 3.18.). This includes completion of an
48 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
investigation begun prior to the close-out date or confirmation of behavior that was only
alleged as of the close-out date. For fitness, an extension may be requested to authorize a
member to test again to meet the standard if justification is warranted. An extension to
document a failure for fitness is not authorized.
1.12.4. Derogatory Information and Disciplinary Actions.
1.12.4.1. Conduct Based on Unreliable Information.
1.12.4.1.1. Raters must ensure that information used to document performance,
especially derogatory information relating to unsatisfactory behavior or misconduct, is
reliable and supported by a preponderance of the evidence. (T-1)
1.12.4.1.2. The rater should consult with the servicing Staff Judge Advocate whenever
there are questions as to whether this standard has been met.
1.12.4.1.3. Raters should be particularly cautious about referring to charges preferred,
investigations, or boards of inquiry (such as accident investigation boards); or using
information obtained from those sources, or any similar actions related to a member,
that are not complete as of the close-out date of the evaluation.
1.12.4.1.4. When it is determined that such conduct is appropriate for comment, refer
to the underlying performance, behavior or misconduct itself and not merely to the fact
that the conduct may have resulted in a punitive or administrative action taken against
the member (such as a letter of reprimand, Article 15, court-martial conviction).
Example: An evaluator should say: “SSgt Johnson engaged in drunk and disorderly
conduct and drove while intoxicated,” rather than “SSgt Johnson got an Article 15 for
violations of Article 92 and 134.”
1.12.4.1.5. (USSF officers only) If an extension to the close-out date might be
warranted to determine if reliable information of unsatisfactory performance or
misconduct has been established, refer to paragraph 3.18.
1.12.4.2. Acquittals or Similar Results.
1.12.4.2.1. Do not reference any criminal action against an individual that resulted in
acquittal or recommended personnel action that was denied by the approval authority.
(T-1). For example, an evaluator cannot say: “SSgt Johnson was acquitted of assault
charges,” or “SrA Smith’s involuntary separation action was unsuccessful.”
1.12.4.2.2. Evaluators may mention the underlying conduct that formed the basis for
the action.
1.12.4.2.3. Do not reference any punitive or administrative action taken against the
individual in response to the conduct for which the member was acquitted or where the
action was not actually taken.
1.12.4.3. Punishment. Punishment received as a result of administrative or judicial action
is prohibited. Restrict comments to the conduct and/or behavior that resulted in the
punishment, and the type of administrative or judicial action taken (e.g., Article 15, letter
of reprimand, letter of counseling, etc.).
1.12.4.3.1. Acceptable statements: “Drove while intoxicated, received an Article 15”
and “Failed to report to duty, received a Letter of Reprimand,” etc.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 49
1.12.4.3.2. Prohibited statements: “Sentenced to 6 months confinement,” “Reduced to
the grade of”, “Forfeiture of pay”, “5 days extra duty”.
1.12.4.4. Disciplinary Actions.
1.12.4.4.1. Must be reasonably specific, clearly outlining the event and/or behavior.
Comments such as “conduct unbecoming” or “an error in judgment led to an off-duty
incident” are too vague.
1.12.4.4.2. Advise ratees specifically on why they are considered substandard in order
to avoid speculation and assist them in responding appropriately. (T-1)
1.12.4.4.3. An evaluation should not simply contain the comment that "MSgt Smith
received an Article 15 during this period." Instead, the underlying conduct should be
specifically cited with the resulting action included, such as: "During this reporting
period, Lieutenant Jones sexually harassed a female subordinate for which he received
an Article 15," or “MSgt Jones drove while under the influence, for which he received
an Article 15.”
1.12.4.4.4. In any case, the focus of the comment should be on the conduct or behavior.
Evaluators should consult the servicing Staff Judge Advocate or local personnel
advisors for questions regarding the appropriateness of including comments about
misconduct and/or the resulting actions on a performance evaluation.
1.12.5. A Recommendation for Decoration. Only include those decorations approved or
presented during the reporting period. The term “decorations,” as used here, applies to those
in which a medal is awarded and worn on the Air Force uniform, such as an Air Force
Achievement Medal. Other awards or nominations for honors and awards such as "Outstanding
Maintenance Officer" or “Twelve Outstanding Airmen of the Year” may be mentioned.
1.12.6. Meeting Goals for/Results of the Combined Federal Campaign. Comments pertaining
to met/exceeded goals or collected dollar amount (Example: 100% contact, $15K raised, 500
contacted) are prohibited.
1.12.7. Weighted Airman Promotion System Data. Score data on the Weighted Airman
Promotion System Data score notice or SNCO promotion score notice, board scores, test
scores, relative standings among peers etc. are prohibited.
1.12.8. Performance Feedback Assessment. Evaluators do not refer to performance feedback
sessions in any area of the performance evaluation except in the performance feedback
certification block or the remarks section of Forms 910/911/912.
1.12.9. Matrices, fact sheets, background sheets or other documents unless specifically
authorized in this instruction. Evaluators will use performance and duty related information
from official source documents in the assessment of performance and potential. Demographic
diversity information identifying inherent or socially defined personal characteristics such as
age, race/ethnicity, religion, gender, socioeconomic status, family status, disability, and
geographic origin will not be considered. (T-1)
1.12.10. Do not establish panels or boards to review and collectively score, rate, rank, or tally
records and/or generate a priority list for determining promotion recommendations, level of
endorsement or stratification, except as authorized in this instruction. (T-1)
50 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
1.12.11. Awards are recognitions based on a given set of criteria and are standalone
achievements. Accordingly, stratification statements based on awards are not authorized.
1.13. Policy Deviations and Waiver Requests. See Table 1.1 for the offices of primary
responsibility mailing addresses. Send requests for deviations or waivers through the wing or delta
commander or the comparative level to AFPC/DPMSPE (or appropriate ANG/AFR) who, in turn,
will forward the request to appropriate office of primary responsibility.
1.13.1. Requests will be in memorandum format with all the appropriate endorsements and
detail the reason for the request with full justification. If the request is applicable to a specific
organization or individual, it must include the name of the unit or the name and grade of the
individual.
1.13.2. All deviation requests pertaining to SRID issues require coordination through the
respective management level and must be signed by the head of the management level. (T-1)
1.13.3. Signed requests will be mailed or emailed to the AFPC/DPMSPE or appropriate
ANG/AFR office stated in Table 1.1.
1.13.4. All waiver requests to use the AF Form 715 and AF Form 716 will require coordination
through the wing commander/equivalent and AFPC/DP3SP for RegAF and to ARPC/DPTS
for ARC with final approval from HAF/A1PP. If authorized, enter the following statement in
the “Mandatory Comments” block: “Use of the AF Form 715/AF Form 716 is authorized IAW
DAFI 36-2406.”
1.14. Missing, Late and Removed Performance Evaluations. When an evaluation is missing
and all attempts to locate are exhausted and unsuccessful, consider re-accomplishing the report.
However, before doing so, evaluators should consider such things as: how long it has been since
the report closed out; are all the evaluators readily available; is there a draft of the original still
available; does the ratee or any of the evaluators have a copy of the original report; can the
evaluators now give a fair and accurate report based on the timeframe? (See Table 1.2.). Note:
Do not re-accomplish evaluations more than 18 months past the close-out date.
1.14.1. Missing Evaluations on RegAF and USSF Officers and Senior Noncommissioned
Officers. The CSS, MPF, AFPC, and/or Air Reserve Personnel Center (ARPC) initiates action
to try and locate the missing report.
1.14.1.1. If the report is located or is able to be re-accomplished (must be the original
evaluators at the time of the close-out), place the original evaluation in the permanent
record or send the original to AF/A1LO of SF/S1L for colonels and colonel selects,
AF/A1LE or SF/S1L for CMSgts and CMSgt selects, and forward a copy to
AFPC/DP1ORM for file into ARMS and PRDA.
1.14.1.2. If the report is not located, or cannot be re-accomplished, the CSS, MPF, AFPC,
or ARPC will prepare an DAF Form 77 according to Table 5.1 and insert the original into
the OSR/National Security Agency, or send the original to AF/A1LO or SF/S1L for colonel
and colonel selects, AF/A1LE for CMSgts and CMSgt selects, and forward a copy to
AFPC/DP1ORM for file in ARMS and PRDA.
1.14.2. Missing Evaluations on RegAF and USSF Enlisted TSgts and Below. The MPF,
initiates action to locate the missing report.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 51
1.14.2.1. If the report is located, forward the original evaluation to AFPC/DP1SSP or
ARPC for file in ARMS and PRDA.
1.14.2.2. If a report is not located or cannot be re-accomplished, the MPF prepares aa DAF
Form 77 in accordance with Table 5.1 and forwards to AFPC/DP1ORM for file in ARMS
and PRDA.
1.14.3. Missing Evaluations for AFR. The OSR custodian, the ARPC commander, or office
as prescribed by the commander concerned, initiates action to locate the missing report.
1.14.3.1. If the report is located, place the original evaluation in the OSR and forward a
copy to ARPC/DPTS for filing in ARMS and PRDA.
1.14.3.2. If the report is not located or unable to be re-accomplished, the MPF will prepare
an DAF Form 77 in accordance with Table 5.1 and forward to ARPC/DPTS for filing in
ARM and PRDA.
1.14.4. Missing Evaluations for ANG only. The CSS, force support squadron (FSS), or human
resource (HR) specialist will initiate action to locate missing reports for Active Guard/Reserve
(AGR) or DSG personnel, and NGB/HR for statutory tour personnel.
1.14.4.1. If the report is located, forward the original evaluation to ARPC/DPTAR for
filing in ARMS and PRDA.
1.14.4.2. If the report is not located or unable to be re-accomplished, the CSS, FSS, or HR
specialist will prepare DAF Form 77 in accordance with Table 5.1 and forward to
ARPC/DPTAR for filing in ARMS and PRDA. (T-1) ARPC/DPTAR will update the
personnel system.
1.14.5. Evaluations Removed From Records Under Chapter 10 or under DAFI 36-2603, Air
Force Board for Correction of Military Records. Prepare an DAF Form 77 in accordance with
Table 5.1.
1.15. Wartime or National Emergency Provisions.
1.15.1. During wartime or a national emergency, HAF, HSF, AFPC, or
MAJCOMs/FLDCOMs, when delegated, may make changes to evaluation policies and
procedures to reduce the associated workload while ensuring performance is documented.
MAJCOMs/FLDCOMs may implement these procedures totally or in part depending on the
nature and scope of the situation. In implementing wartime provisions, a MAJCOM/FLDCOM
may implement HAF/HSF/AFPC procedures totally or in part. When implementing in part,
MAJCOMs/FLDCOMs must provide specific instructions regarding completing and routing
evaluations. (T-1)
1.15.2. In implementing wartime provisions, AFPC/DP3SP, in coordination with AF/REP and
NGB/A1P, will provide specific instructions regarding completion of evaluations, routing
evaluations once completed, and any other appropriate actions. AFPC/DPMSPE or ARPC/PB
will announce officer promotion recommendation form (PRF) procedures (see Chapter 8).
AF/A1PP, SF/S1PP, and AFPC/DP3SP will determine whether to restrict provisions for the
performance evaluations to certain theaters or organizations and whether to implement them
in part, totally, or incrementally. They may make performance feedbacks optional. Commands
must implement the provisions outlined below or as AFPC/DP3SP directs.
52 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
1.15.3. When to Submit Performance Evaluations.
1.15.3.1. Evaluations that are due prior to a deployment.
1.15.3.2. A deployment does not change the requirement to prepare annual/biennial
evaluations.
Figure 1.1. Example Referral Memorandum.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 53
Figure 1.2. Example Referral Memorandum (Continued).
54 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Table 1.1. Mailing Addresses for Correspondence.
R
U
L
E
A
B
Address
OPR
1
HQ AFPC/DP3SP
550 C Street West
Joint Base San Antonio-
Randolph TX 78150
(Note: All processing of evaluations is
completed by AFPC/DP1SSP via CMS or
myEval).
Manages the Officer and Enlisted
Evaluation Systems, including
evaluation appeals, for all RegAF
airman basic through lieutenant colonel
and all USSF specialist 1 through
lieutenant colonel following direction
provided by AF/A1P or SF/S1P.
2
HQ AFPC/DPMSPE
550 C Street West
Joint Base San Antonio-Randolph TX 78150
Manages the student management level
review (MLR) and all promotion
recommendation form actions with
direction from AFPC/DP3SP and
AF/A1P.
3
HQ AFPC/DPMSPE
550 C Street West
Joint Base San Antonio
Randolph TX 78150
Evaluation Appeals. Administers the
ERAB. Training reports.
4
AF/A1LG
1040 Air Force Pentagon
Washington District of Columbia 20330-1040
Air Force General Matters Office.
Manages Officer Evaluation System for,
and maintains all evaluations on, general
officers and brig gen selects on extended
active duty. Note: All wet signature
evaluations on active duty GOs are sent
to this address. See Note 2.
5
USAF/REG
1150 Air Force Pentagon
Washington District of Columbia 20330-1040
AFR General Officer Matters Office.
Manages Officer Evaluation System for
Reserve general officers (and brig gen
selects).
See Note 2.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 55
6
AF/A1LO
1040 Air Force Pentagon
Washington District of Columbia 20330-1040
Air Force Colonel Management Office.
Manages Officer Evaluation System for
and maintains all evaluations on,
colonels (except brig gen selects) and
col selects on the Active Duty List
(ADL).
Note: All wet signature evaluations on
RegAF cols are sent to this address. See
Note 1.
7
AF/A1LE
1040 Air Force Pentagon
Washington District of Columbia 20330-1040
Air Force Chief Matters Office.
Maintains all evaluations on RegAF
CMSgts and CMSgt selects. Note: All
wet signature evaluations on RegAF
CMSgts are sent to this address. See
Note 1.
8
SF/S1L (4D284)
2020 Air Force Pentagon
Washington DC 20330-2020
Space Force Senior Leader Management
Office. Manages officer evaluation
system for, and maintains all evaluations
on, USSF general officers (to include
brigadier general selects), colonels, and
colonel selects. Additionally, maintains
all evaluations on USSF chief master
sergeants and chief master sergeant
selects. Note: All wet signature
evaluations are sent to this address. See
Notes 1 and 2.
9
HQ ARPC/DPTS
18420 E. Silver Creek Ave Bldg 390 MS 68
Buckley SFB CO 80011
Records and Board Support Division.
Manages the Officer Evaluation System
for ARC officers not on the ADL and
the Enlisted Evaluation System for ARC
enlisted personnel following policy
provided by HAF/A1P, HAF/RE and
NGB/A1PP. Note: All wet signature
evaluations on ARC personnel are sent
to this office, except general officers.
10
HQ AFPC/DP1ORM
550 C Street West
Joint Base San Antonio-Randolph TX 78150
Maintains the ARMS and PRDA on all
RegAF personnel.
11
HQ ARPC/DPTS
18420 E. Silver Creek Ave Bldg 390 MS 68
Buckley SFB CO 80011
(Reserve/Guard ARMS) Maintains the
ARMS on all ARC personnel.
See Note 2.
56 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
12
AF/RE
1150 Air Force Pentagon
Washington District of Columbia 20330-1150
Provides AFR Officer Evaluation
System and Enlisted Evaluation System
policy with collaboration with AF/A1P
and AFPC/DP3SP.
13
HQ AFPC/DPMN
550 C Street West
Joint Base San Antonio-Randolph TX 78150-
4727
Medical Service Officer Management.
Provides advice on reporting policy for
officers within the health professions, in
conjunction with AF/SG1, Medical
Force Development Directorate, Office
of the Surgeon General, AF/SG.
14
AFRC/A1
155 Richard Bay Blvd
Robins AFB GA 31098-5000
Responsible for effective management
and operation of all AFRC Manpower,
Personnel and Services programs, plans,
policies and procedures.
15
AFRC/A1K
155 Richard Bay Blvd
Robins AFB GA 31098-5000
Promotions, Retention and Customer
Service Branch. Provides AF Officer
Evaluation System and Enlisted
Evaluation System policy and guidance
following policy provided by AF/A1PP
or AF/RE.
16
AFRC/A1L
555 Robins Pkwy Ste 210 Blvd
Robins AFB GA 31098-5000
Senior Leader (Colonel) Management
Division for AFRC.
17
NGB-GOMO Bldg 2
111 South George Mason Drive
Arlington VA 22204
National Guard General Officer
Management Office. Responsible for
promotions and evaluations for all
National Guard brig gen and above.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 57
18
NGB/A1P
3500 Fetchet Ave.
Joint Base Andrews, MD 20762
Force Management Division.
NGB/A1PO - Responsible for Officer
Programs and Policy for colonels and
below.
NGB/A1PP - Responsible for enlisted
evaluations and enlisted promotions
with collaboration with AF/A1P and
AFPC/DPSID.
19
Professional Development Directorate
1420 Air Force Pentagon, Suite 5D140
Washington District of Columbia 20330-1420
The Judge Advocate General’s Corps
Professional Development Directorate.
Provides advice on reporting policy for
judge advocates.
Note:
1. All digitally signed evaluations (colonels and below) must be submitted through myEval
or CMS. (T-1).
2. All digitally signed GO evaluations must be submitted through Right Now Technology.
Table 1.2. Missing and Late Evaluations (See Notes 1 and 2).
R
U
L
E
A
B
C
The report was located
or successfully re-
accomplishment:
and the
system
contains the
overall rating
and close-out
date:
Then:
1
No
Yes
When authorized by AFPC/ARPC the
CSS/MPF/HR specialist or the Joint Forces
Headquarters (Human Resource Office) or
NGB/HR who discovers the discrepancy
prepares DAF Form 77. See Table 5.1.
2
No
When authorized by AFPC/ARPC the
CSS/MPF/HR specialist prepares DAF Form
77. See Table 5.1.
3
Yes
File form according to paragraph 1.14.1.1.
and update the system, if appropriate.
58 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Notes:
1. The gaining CSS/MPF/HR specialist, the Joint Forces Headquarters (Human Resource
Office) or NGB/HR tracks missing or late evaluations. Do not re-accomplish evaluations
more than 18 months past the close-out date. DAF Form 77s are prepared by the
CSS/MPF/HR specialist.
2. When all attempts to find the missing evaluation fail, the HR specialist sends an inquiry
to AFPC/DPMSPE or ARPC/DPTSE (officers/SNCOs), requesting that AFPC/DPMSPE or
HQ ARPC/DPTS search the history files for the enlisted evaluation rating. Include in the
request:
a. All known information that may assist in identifying the missing evaluation.
b. An account of all actions taken to find the missing evaluation. For personnel with prior
service, do not send a request to AFPC/DPMSPE or ARPC/DPTSE for missing evaluations
earlier than 120 calendar days after the date the ratee reentered to duty. The CSS/MPF/HR
specialist provides this information when requesting a search for missing evaluations on
personnel with prior service:
name, grade, social security number, grade at separation, date of separation, whether a DAF
Form 1613, Statement of Service, might exist.
Note: If AFPC/DPMSPE or finds the rating in the history files, complete an DAF Form 77
according to Table 5.1. When more than one evaluation is involved, the MPF/CSS/HR
specialist may prepare one DAF Form 77 according to Table 5.1, if no gaps exist in the
period of the missing evaluations. However, if the military personnel flight
(MPF)/commander’s support staff (CSS)/human resource (HR) specialist later receives one
or more of the missing evaluations, the MPF/CSS/HR specialist prepares one or more AF
Forms 77, as required, so that periods of time in the performance record remain consecutive.
If the rating is not available, comply with Table 5.1.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 59
Chapter 2
PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK PROCESS
2.1. Purpose. A performance feedback assessment is a formal, two-way communication between
a rater and ratee to discuss standards, responsibilities, expectations, and goals. Raters document
the feedback session to assess or discuss the objectives, standards, behavior, and performance with
the ratee. Providing this information helps an individual improve communication and
performance, while growing professionally. The following information applies to all military
personnel.
2.2. Responsibilities.
2.2.1. The ratee will:
2.2.1.1. Know when formal feedback sessions are due. (T-3)
2.2.1.2. When needed, request a “Ratee Requested” feedback session from the rater. If a
ratee requests a feedback session, the rater will provide one within 30 calendar days of the
request. (T-3)
2.2.1.3. Provide timely notification to the rater and, if necessary, the rater’s rater, when
required or requested feedback did not take place. (T-3)
2.2.1.4. Complete Section III on their own and review Section VII (AF Form 724), Section
IX (AF Form 931), or VIII (AF Form 932) in preparation for the feedback session. (T-3)
2.2.1.5. Sign the feedback indicating the date the supervisor conducted the feedback.
(T-3)
2.2.2. The rater will:
2.2.2.1. Know when formal feedbacks are due and provide them, at a minimum, as
required by this instruction. (T-3)
2.2.2.2. Use this instruction to assist in preparing for, scheduling, and conducting feedback
sessions. See Tables 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4. (T-3)
2.2.2.3. Understand, demonstrate, and communicate Air Force or Space Force standards
and expectations such as those outlined in the Enlisted Force Structure, when providing
feedback assessments to personnel. (T-3)
2.2.2.4. Provide effective assessments by being realistic, honest, and timely. This will
help the ratee improve performance and grow professionally and personally. Effective
assessments may differ for each Airman or Guardian but can include in-depth discussions
with the ratee and written comments on the assessment. (T-3)
2.2.2.5. Provide the original completed and signed assessment to the ratee. (T-3)
2.2.2.6. Retain a copy of the signed and dated assessment. The midterm formal feedback
is required to be routed with the evaluation but will not be part the official record. See
paragraph 2.9.3 for individuals authorized to view the assessment. Exception:
Extremely rare circumstances may exist where a documented midterm assessment is not
available to be routed with the evaluation (e.g., the rater has been removed from
supervisory/rater duties). (T-3)
60 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
2.2.2.7. Feedback sessions are a communication tool and are not to be used to discover or
document behavior which may result in administrative or judicial action. (T-3) Document
behavior that deviates from DAF standards through a letter of reprimand, letter of
counseling, letter of admonishment, or memorandum for record. (T-3)
2.2.2.8. Provide the ratee the most current “Benefits Fact Sheet” (available on AF Portal).
(T-3)
2.2.2.9. Include expectations to ratees for contributing to a healthy organizational climate
for Airmen or Guardians up to the grade of SrA or Spc4. (T-1) Raters will also ensure that
NCOs and officers are accountable for creating a healthy organizational climate. (T-1)
Raters will ensure that every commander knows they are responsible for, and will be held
accountable for, ensuring their unit has a healthy command climate. (T-0)
2.2.3. (USSF only) The additional rater will:
2.2.3.1. Ensure raters properly conduct timely feedback sessions. (T-3)
2.2.3.2. Conduct feedback sessions when the rater is not available due to unusual
circumstances or when officially assuming the rater’s responsibilities. (T-3)
2.2.4. The unit commander will:
2.2.4.1. Oversee the performance feedback program. (T-2)
2.2.4.2. Consider disciplining and removing supervisory responsibilities for raters who fail
to conduct proper and timely feedback sessions. (T-2)
2.2.5. The Military Personnel Flight (MPF) will:
2.2.5.1. Provide guidance on the performance feedback program and assist CSSs when
needed. (T-3)
2.2.5.2. Not be required to maintain a repository for performance feedback assessments
for personnel assigned.
2.2.6. Raters are responsible for maintaining copies of formal feedbacks on their assigned
ratees.
2.3. Who Requires a Performance Feedback Assessment. Performance feedback assessments
are mandatory for all RegAF and ARC Airmen, airman basic through colonel, and USSF
Guardians, specialist 1 through colonel. Performance feedback assessments are not prepared when
a ratee is in a captive, patient, prisoner, or absent without leave status. For officers receiving an
AF Form 475 and enlisted in approved initial or advanced skills training courses, performance
feedback assessments may be completed at the discretion of the commander of the school. For
performance evaluations completed on non-rated initial skills training or advanced skills training
course students, academic progress reports will serve in lieu of the mandatory mid-term
performance feedback session. (T-3)
2.4. Guidance for Conducting Performance Feedback Sessions. Conduct sessions face-to-
face (may include video conferencing). (T-3). Exception: When this is not feasible, sessions
may be conducted by telephone. In these cases, after the performance feedback session is
complete, the rater will forward the finalized form to the ratee within 10 calendar days. (T-3).
2.5. When to Conduct Documented Performance Feedback Sessions. See Table 2.1.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 61
2.6. The Performance Feedback Assessment Notice.
2.6.1. The rater should receive a computer-generated notice 30 calendar days after supervision
begins and again halfway between the time supervision began and the projected performance
report close-out date. The notice serves to remind the rater that a performance feedback session
is due. However, failing to receive a notice does not justify failing to or negate the rater’s
responsibility to conduct a required session.
2.6.2. For ANG officers, the MPF will send the performance feedback notice to the rater
concurrently with the officer evaluation notice or upon initial assignment of the ratee. Conduct
the performance feedback session no later than 60 calendar days after the officer evaluation
close-out date or initial assignment date.
2.6.3. Since the ratee shares the responsibility to ensure performance feedback sessions are
conducted, the notice is also sent to the ratee, 30 calendar days after sending the notice to the
rater (for officers) or concurrently with the notice sent to the rater (for enlisted).
2.6.4. For IMAs, the performance feedback notice is sent to the supervisor’s RegAF MPF for
forwarding to the supervisor.
2.6.5. ANG does not currently have a standardized, automated process to create airman
comprehensive assessment (ACA) notices for raters and ratees. ANG MPFs may not be able
to provide raters and ratees with a computer-generated ACA notice. If computer-generated
notices are not available, MPFs should use alternate forms of communication to notify raters
and ratees. Mass communication from MPF to wing personnel is acceptable. Signed notices
are not required for ANG personnel.
2.7. Performance Feedback Assessment Forms.
2.7.1. For second lieutenant through colonel, use AF Form 724. See Table 2.4 for
instructions.
2.7.2. For MSgt (including selects) through CMSgt, use AF Form 932. See Table 2.3 for
instructions.
2.7.3. For AB/Spc1 through TSgt, use AF Form 931. See Table 2.2 for instructions.
2.7.4. For SNCOs, raters have the option to use the AF Form 724-A as an informal guiding
document to supplement performance feedback. For RegAF and ARC officers in the grade of
second lieutenant through colonel, raters will use the AF Form 724-A in addition to the AF
Form 724.
2.7.4.1. The AF Form 724-A is designed to guide raters and facilitate discussion when
providing constructive feedback to their ratees. The addendum should be used in
conjunction with the primary AF Form 724 and AF Form 932, not in lieu of it.
2.7.4.2. This addendum highlights four major performance areas, each with certain ALQs
for Airmen to focus on.
2.7.4.3. For officers only, when the AF Form 724-A replaces Section VI
“PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK” items 1 - 6 on the AF Form 724.
62 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
2.7.4.4. A rater should use their best judgement when determining the proficiency level of
their ratee, bearing in mind that each definition should be relative to the ratee’s specific
grade, AFSC, and assigned duties.
2.7.4.5. See Table 2.5 for additional instructions.
2.8. Preparing the Performance Feedback Assessment.
2.8.1. The performance feedback assessment should outline the issues discussed during the
feedback session; however, it is primarily a guide for conducting the assessment session, not a
transcript. Therefore, omission of an issue from the form does not, by itself, constitute proof
that the issue was not discussed.
2.8.2. The assessment may be handwritten or typed by the rater providing the assessment.
2.9. Disposition and Access.
2.9.1. Do not make the performance feedback assessment an official part of any personnel
record (including personal information files) or use it in any personnel action except for
paragraph 2.9.3. (T-1) Note: At a minimum, the rater will maintain a copy of the feedback
until the evaluation becomes a matter of record. (T-3)
2.9.2. The ratee may grant access to the completed forms at their discretion.
2.9.3. The forms will not be reviewed by anyone other than the rater, ratee and authorized
personnel as outlined in the following paragraphs, specifically for the purposes of completing
performance evaluations. (T-1) Neither form will be introduced in any other personnel action
unless the ratee first introduces them or alleges either a performance feedback session was not
conducted, or the sessions were inadequate. (T-1)
2.9.3.1. For enlisted, the additional rater or HLR, rater’s rater (when the additional rater is
not also the rater’s rater), CSS, first sergeant, squadron/group superintendents or
equivalent, squadron/group/wing/delta commanders or equivalent, forced distributor, MPF
personnel, command chief, final evaluator, and functional examiner/Air Force or Space
Force advisor (when applicable) are authorized access to the performance feedback
assessment specifically for the purpose of completing and processing performance
evaluations. (T-1)
2.9.3.2. For officers, the CSS, first sergeant, squadron/group/wing/delta commanders or
equivalent, reviewer/HLR, functional examiner/Air Force or Space Force advisor (when
applicable), and MPF personnel are authorized access to the performance feedback
assessment specifically for the purpose of completing and processing performance
evaluations. (T-1)
2.9.4. Temporary Duty (TDY) supervisors may conduct assessments and complete a feedback
assessment. However, it will not be sent to the home station rater. (T-1). A memo will be
sent to the home station rater if there are any issues the temporary supervisor may wish to
address. (T-1) Exception: If the TDY rater has been officially designated as the ratee’s
reporting official, a feedback assessment is required.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 63
2.10. Failure to Conduct or Document a Performance Feedback Assessment. While
documented feedback sessions are required by this instruction, they do not replace informal day-
to-day communication and feedback. A rater's failure to conduct a required or requested feedback
session or failure to document the session, will not, in and of itself, invalidate any subsequent
evaluation or PRF.
2.11. Tracking Performance Feedback Assessments. Unit commanders may establish
procedures beyond those provided in this instruction to validate feedback completion compliance
provided those procedures do not violate paragraph 2.9.3.
Table 2.1. Performance Feedback Assessment Requirements.
R
U
L
E
A
B
If the ratee is
then the ratee requires the following
feedback
1
a CMSgt or a Col
Initial (See Notes 1 & 4)
2
a MSgt or SMSgt, Maj or Lt Col
Initial (See Notes 1 & 4)
Midterm (See Notes 2 & 4)
End-of-reporting period (See Note 3)
3
an AB/Spc1, Amn/Spc2 or A1C/Spc3
(who has already received an enlisted
evaluation), a SrA/Spc4 through TSgt,
a Lt through Capt
(see Notes 6)
Initial (See Notes 1 & 4)
Midterm (See Notes 2 & 4)
End-of-reporting period (See Note 3)
4
an AB/Spc1, Amn/Spc2 or A1C/Spc3
(with less than 20 months total active
federal military service or less than 20
months Date Initial Entry Uniformed
Services for ARC )
Initial (See Note 1)
Midterm (See Note 5)
5
an AB/Spc1 through Col
Requested by Ratee (See Note 7)
6
an AB/Spc1 through Col
When determined necessary by the rater
64 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Notes:
1. The rater must conduct the initial feedback session within the first 60 calendar days
they initially begin supervision. This will be the ratee’s only initial feedback until they
have a change of reporting official. For CMSgts and cols, this is the only feedback
required.
2. The rater must conduct the midterm feedback session midway between the date
supervision begins and the projected close-out date of the next evaluation.
3. The rater conducts an end-of reporting period feedback session when an evaluation has
been accomplished. This session must be conducted within 60 calendar days of the close-
out of the evaluation and serves two distinct purposes. The first purpose is to review and
discuss with the ratee the previous reporting period and resulting evaluation. The second
purpose is to establish expectations for the new reporting period. This feedback may be
accomplished using an evaluation that just closed or a new AF Form 724 or AF Form 931.
4. ARC personnel are not required to complete an Airman Comprehensive Assessment for
a member who is pending separation or discharge under DAFI 36-3211, Military
Separations.
5. After the initial feedback session is conducted, conduct a (midterm) feedback session
every 180 calendar days until the rater writes an enlisted evaluation or a change of
reporting official occurs.
6. If the ratee is due an annual evaluation and the period of supervision is less than 150
days, the rater conducts the feedback session approximately 60 calendar days before the
projected evaluation close-out date.
7. When a ratee requests a feedback session, the rater must conduct a session within 30
calendar days of the ratee’s request if at least 60 calendar days have passed (at the rater’s
discretion) since the last feedback session.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 65
Table 2.2. Preparing AF Form 931, Airman Comprehensive Assessment (AB thru TSgt).
Note: Air Force terminology applies to the Space Force equivalent (e.g., Airman applies
to Guardian, Air Force Core Values applies to Space Force Core Values, etc.).
SECTION I. RATEE IDENTIFICATION DATA (to be completed by rater)
I
T
E
M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
1
Name
In all upper case, enter last name, first name, middle initial,
and any suffix (i.e., JR., SR, III). If there is no middle initial,
the use of No Middle Name “NMI” is optional.
2
Grade (Rank)
Self-explanatory
3
Unit
Enter information as of the ACA completion date. The goal is
an accurate description of what unit the ratee belongs.
For IMAs, PIRR and PIRR Cat E, information will be that of
unit of attachment.
SECTION II. TYPE OF ASSESSMENT (to be completed by rater)
I
T
E
M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
4
Type of Assessment
Indicate whether the assessment is initial, midterm, follow-up,
ratee requested, or rater directed. Sections VI, VII and VIII
will not be completed during initial feedback sessions.
Once Section II is completed the rater forwards the ACA form
to the ratee for a self-assessment. The information captured
during the self-assessment will assist the rater when
accomplishing the remaining areas of the overall assessment.
SECTION III. SELF-ASSESSMENT (to be completed by ratee)
I
T
E
M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
66 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
5
Responsibility,
Accountability, Air Force
Culture, and Self
Ratee will place a “Y” in the block indicating they understand
the importance of the self-assessment area or a “N” to indicate
they need more information from the rater in order to make a
self-assessment in that area.
After the ratee completes the self-assessment, they will return
the ACA form to the rater.
SECTION IV. AIRMAN’S CRITICAL ROLE IN SUPPORT OF THE MISSION
(to be completed by rater)
I
T
E
M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
6
Airman’s Critical Role in
Support of the Mission
Completed by the rater to identify the ratee’s critical role in
achieving mission success.
SECTION V. INDIVIDUAL READINESS INDEX (to be completed by rater)
I
T
E
M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
7
Individual Readiness
Index
Rater consults the unit deployment manager to identify the
ratee’s current deployment status and AEF indicator.
Rater will place an “R” in the first box indicating the ratee’s
readiness status as currently not deployable or “G” if the
ratee’s current readiness status is deployable.
8
AEF Indicator
Rater will identify the AEF indicator in the second box.
SECTION VI. PERFORMANCE: LEADERSHIP/PRIMARY
DUTIES/FOLLOWERSHIP/TRAINING (to be completed by rater)
I
T
E
M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
9
Task
Knowledge/Proficiency
Consider the quality, quantity, results, and impact of the
Airman’s knowledge and ability to accomplish tasks. See
Note.
10
Initiative/Motivation
Describes the degree of willingness to execute duties, motivate
team members, and develop innovative new processes. See
Note.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 67
11
Skill Level Upgrade
Training
Consider skill level awarding course, CDC timeliness and/or
completion, course exam results, and completion of core task
training. Mark “N/A” for Airmen or Guardians who possess
required skill level/training. See Note.
12
Duty Position
Requirements,
qualifications, and
certifications
Consider duty position qualifications, career field certifications
(if applicable), and readiness requirements. Mark “N/A” for
Airmen or Guardians who possess training commensurate with
grade prior to reporting period. See Note.
13
Training of others
Consider the Airman’s effort and impact made by training
others. Mark “N/A” for Airmen or Guardians who have no
valid opportunity to train. See Note.
14
Comments
Provide specific comments tailored to those areas assessed in
Section VI.
SECTION VII. FOLLOWERSHIP/LEADERSHIP (to be completed by rater)
I
T
E
M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
15
Resource utilization (e.g.,
time management,
equipment, manpower and
budget)
Consider how effectively the Airman utilizes resources to
accomplish the mission. See Note.
16
Comply with/enforce
standards
Consider personal adherence and enforcement of fitness
standards, dress and personal appearance, customs and
courtesies, and professional conduct. See Note.
17
Communication skills
Describes how well the Airman receives and relays
information, thoughts, and ideas up and down the chain of
command (includes listening, reading, speaking, and writing
skills); fosters an environment for open dialogue. See Note.
18
Caring, respectful and
dignified environment
(teamwork)
Rate how well the Airman selflessly considers others, values
diversity, and sets the stage for an environment of dignity and
respect, to include promoting a healthy organizational climate.
See Note.
19
Comments
Provide specific comments tailored to those areas assessed in
Section VII.
SECTION VIII. WHOLE AIRMAN CONCEPT (to be completed by rater)
I
T
E
M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
68 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
20
Air Force Core Values
Consider how well the Airman adopts, internalizes, and
demonstrates our Air Force Core Values. See Note.
21
Personal and Professional
Development
Consider the amount of effort the Airman devoted to
improving themselves and their work center/unit through
education and involvement. See Note.
22
Esprit de corps and
community relations
Consider how well Airman promotes camaraderie, embraces
esprit de corps, and acts as an Air Force ambassador. See
Note.
23
Comments
Provide specific comments tailored to those areas assessed in
Section VIII.
SECTION IX. KNOWING YOUR AIRMAN (to be completed during formal
feedback between rater and ratee)
I
T
E
M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
24
Questions 1-7
Completed during Airman Comprehensive Assessment session
discussion. Provides questions designed to facilitate open
communication between the ratee/rater and may trigger areas
and/or specific items which need to be probed in more depth.
These questions are not intended to be all encompassing. The
purpose is to help start the conversation on the particular item,
not make it an interrogation. Items 6 and 7 are designed to
receive feedback from the ratee and to set specific expectations
for the ratee’s growth.
I
T
E
M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
25
Ratee/Rater Signature and
Date
In the instance where digital signatures are not used, sign in
reproducible blue or black ink and handwrite or date stamp the
date. Do not sign blank forms or sign before the Airman
Comprehensive Assessment completion date (only on the date
of completion). The forms have digital capability; the use of
digital signatures is optional.
Note: Use the appropriate word picture/rating assigned to each area on the performance
assessment when filling out the Airman Comprehensive Assessment.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 69
Table 2.3. Preparing AF Form 932 (MSgt - CMSgt) Airman Comprehensive Assessment.
Note: Air Force terminology applies to the Space Force equivalent (e.g., Airman applies
to Guardian, Air Force Core Values applies to Space Force Core Values, etc.).
SECTION I. RATEE IDENTIFICATION DATA (to be completed by rater)
I
T
E
M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
1
Name
In all upper case, enter last name, first name, middle initial,
and any suffix (i.e., JR., SR, III). If there is no middle initial,
the use of “NMI” is optional.
2
Grade (Rank)
Self-explanatory
3
Unit
Enter information as of Airman Comprehensive Assessment
completion date. The goal is an accurate description of what
unit the ratee belongs.
For IMAs, PIRR and PIRR Cat E, information will be that of
unit of attachment.
Information will be in all upper/lower case.
SECTION II. TYPE OF ASSESSMENT (to be completed by rater)
I
T
E
M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
4
Type of Assessment
Indicate whether the assessment is initial, mid-term, ratee
requested, or rater directed (Sections VI and VII will not be
completed during initial feedback sessions).
Once Section II is completed the rater forwards the Airman
Comprehensive Assessments to the ratee for a self-
assessment. The information captured during the self-
assessment will assist the rater when accomplishing the
remaining areas of the overall assessment.
70 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
SECTION III. SELF ASSESSMENT (to be completed by ratee)
I
T
E
M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
5
Responsibility,
Accountability, Air Force
Culture, and
Self
Ratee will place a “Y” in the block indicating they understand
the importance of the self-assessment area, or a “N” to
indicate they need more information from the rater in order to
make a self-assessment in that area.
After the ratee completes the self- assessment, they will return
the Airman Comprehensive Assessment to the rater.
SECTION IV. AIRMAN’S CRITICAL ROLE IN SUPPORT OF THE MISSION
(to be completed by rater)
I
T E
M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
6
Airman’s Critical Role in
Support of the Mission
Completed by the rater to identify the ratee’s critical role in
achieving mission success.
SECTION V. INDIVIDUAL READINESS INDEX (to be completed by rater)
I
T
E
M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
7
Individual Readiness
Index
Rater consults the unit deployment manager to identify ratee’s
current deployment status and AEF indicator.
Rater will place an “R” in the first box indicating the ratee’s
readiness status as currently non-deployable or “G” if the
ratee’s current readiness status is deployable.
8
AEF Indicator
Rater will identify the AEF indicator in the second box.
SECTION VI. PERFORMANCE: LEADERSHIP/PRIMARYDUTIES/
FOLLOWERSHIP/TRAINING (to be completed by rater)
I
T
E
M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
9
Mission Accomplishment
Consider the Airman’s ability to lead and produce timely,
high quality/quantity, mission-oriented results. See Note.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 71
10
Resource Utilization (e.g.,
time management,
equipment, manpower and
budget)
Consider how effectively the Airman leads their team to
utilize their resources to accomplish the mission. See Note.
11
Team Building
Consider the amount of innovation, initiative and motivation
displayed by the Airman and their subordinates
(collaboration). See Note.
12
Mentorship
Consider how well the Airman knows their subordinates,
accepts personal responsibility for them, and is accountable
for their professional development. See Note.
13
Communication Skills
Describes how well the Airman communicates (includes
listening, reading, speaking and writing skills) in various
mediums, translates superiors’ direction into specific tasks
and responsibilities, fosters an environment for open dialogue
and enhances communication skills of subordinates. See
Note.
14
Complies with/enforces
standards
Consider personal adherence and how the Airman fosters an
environment where everyone enforces fitness standards, dress
and personal appearance, customs and courtesies, and
professional conduct. See Note.
15
Duty Environments
Rate how well the Airman establishes and maintains caring,
respectful, and dignified environments while valuing
diversity, to include promoting a healthy organizational
climate. See Note.
16
Training
Describes how well the Airman and the Airman’s team
complies with upgrade, duty position, and certification
requirements. See Note.
17
Comments
Provide specific comments tailored to those areas assessed in
Section VI.
SECTION VII. WHOLE AIRMAN CONCEPT (to be completed by rater)
I
T E
M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
18
Air Force Core Values
Consider how well the Airman adopts, internalizes,
demonstrates and insists on adherence of our Air Force Core
Values of Integrity First, Service Before Self and Excellence
in All We Do. See Note.
19
Personal and
Professional
Development
Consider the effort the Airman devoted to improving their
subordinates, their work center/unit and themselves.
See Note.
72 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
20
Esprit de corps and
community relations
Consider how well the Airman promotes camaraderie,
enhances esprit de corps, and develops Air Force
ambassadors. See Note.
21
Comments
Provide specific comments tailored to those areas assessed in
Section VII.
SECTION VIII. KNOWING YOUR AIRMAN (to be completed during formal
feedback)
I
T
E
M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
22
Questions 1-7
Completed during the Airman Comprehensive Assessment
session discussion. Provides questions designed to facilitate
open communication between the ratee and rater and may
trigger areas and/or specific items which need to be probed in
more depth. These questions are not intended to be all
encompassing. The purpose is to help start the conversation
on the particular item, not make it an interrogation. Items 6
and 7 are designed to receive feedback from the ratee and to
set specific expectations for the ratee’s growth.
23
Ratee/Rater Signature and
Date
In the instance where digital signatures are not used, sign in
reproducible blue or black ink and handwrite or date stamp
the date. Do not sign blank forms or sign before the Airman
Comprehensive Assessments completion date (only on the
date of completion). The forms have digital capability; the
use of digital signatures is optional.
Note: Use the appropriate word picture/rating assigned to each area on the performance
assessment when filling out the Airman Comprehensive Assessment.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 73
Table 2.4. Preparing AF Form 724 (Lt thru Col) Airman Comprehensive Assessment.
Note: Air Force terminology applies to the Space Force equivalent (e.g., Airman applies
to Guardian, Air Force Core Values applies to Space Force Core Values, etc.).
SECTION I. RATEE IDENTIFICATION DATA (to be completed by rater)
I
T
E M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
1
Name
In all upper case, enter last name, first name, middle initial,
and any suffix (i.e., JR., SR, III). If there is no middle initial,
the use of “NMI” is optional.
2
Rank
Self-explanatory
3
Unit
Enter information as of Airman Comprehensive Assessment
completion date. The goal is an accurate description of what
unit the ratee belongs. For IMAs, PIRR and PIRR Cat E,
information will be that of unit of attachment.
SECTION II. TYPE OF ASSESSMENT (to be completed by rater)
I
T
E
M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
4
Type of Assessment
Indicate whether the assessment is initial, mid-term, follow-
up, ratee requested, or rater directed (Section VI and will not
be completed during initial feedback sessions).
Once Section II is complete the rater forwards the Airman
Comprehensive Assessment to the ratee for a self-assessment.
The information captured during the self-assessment will
assist the rater when accomplishing the remaining areas of the
overall assessment.
74 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
SECTION III. SELF ASSESSMENT (to be completed by ratee)
I
T
E
M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
5
Responsibility,
Accountability, Air Force
Culture, and Self
Ratee will place a “Y” in the block indicating they understand
the importance of the self-assessment area, or a “N” to
indicate they need more information from the rater in order to
make a self-assessment in that area.
After the ratee completes the self- assessment, they will return
the Airman Comprehensive Assessment to the rater.
SECTION IV. AIRMAN’S CRITICAL ROLE IN SUPPORT OF THE MISSION
(to be completed by rater)
I
T
E
M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
6
Airman’s Critical Role in
Support of the Mission
Completed by the rater to identify the ratee’s critical role in
achieving mission success.
SECTION V. INDIVIDUAL READINESS INDEX (to be completed by rater)
I
T
E
M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
7
Individual Readiness
Index
Rater consults the unit deployment manager to identify ratee’s
current deployment status and AEF indicator.
Rater will place an “R” in the first box indicating the ratee’s
readiness status as currently non-deployable or “G” if the
ratee’s current readiness status is deployable.
8
AEF Indicator
Rater will identify the AEF indicator in the second box.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 75
SECTION VI. PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK (to be completed by rater):
Self-explanatory
SECTION VII. KNOWING YOUR AIRMAN (to be completed during formal
feedback between rater and ratee)
I
T
E M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
9
Questions 1 – 7
Completed during an Airman Comprehensive Assessment
session discussion. Provides questions designed to
facilitate open communication between the ratee and rater
and may trigger areas and/or specific items which need to
be probed in more depth. These questions are not
intended to be all encompassing. The purpose is to help
start the conversation on the particular item, not make it
an interrogation. Items 6 and 7 are designed to receive
feedback from the ratee and to set specific expectations for
the ratee’s growth.
10
Ratee/Rater Signature and
Date
In the instance where digital signatures are not used, sign
in reproducible blue or black ink and handwrite or date
stamp the date. Do not sign blank forms or sign before the
Airman Comprehensive Assessment completion date
(only on the date of completion). The forms have digital
capability; the use of digital signatures is optional.
Note: Use the appropriate word picture/rating assigned to each area on the performance
assessment when filling out the Airman Comprehensive Assessment.
76 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Table 2.5. Preparing AF Form 724-A, Airman Comprehensive Assessment Addendum.
SECTION I: EXECUTING THE MISSION
I
T
E
M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
1
Job Proficiency
Using the rubric, determine how well the Airman demonstrates knowledge and
professional skill in assigned duties, achieving positive results and impact in support of
the mission.
2
Initiative
Using the rubric, determine how well the Airman assesses and takes independent or
directed action to complete a task or mission that influences the mission or
organization.
3
Adaptability
Using the rubric, determine how well the Airman adjusts to changing conditions, to
include plans, information, processes, requirements, and obstacles in accomplishing the
mission.
SECTION II: LEADING PEOPLE
I
T
E
M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
1
Inclusion &
Teamwork
Using the rubric, determine how well the Airman collaborates effectively with others
to achieve an inclusive climate in pursuit of a common goal or to complete a task or
mission.
2
Emotional
Intelligence
Using the rubric, determine how well the Airman exercises self-awareness, manages
their own emotions effectively, demonstrates an understanding of others’ emotions,
and appropriately manages relationships.
3
Communication
Using the rubric, determine how well the Airman articulates information in a clear and
timely manner, both verbally and non-verbally, through active listening and messaging
tailored to the appropriate audience.
SECTION III: MANAGING RESOURCES
I
T
E
M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
1
Stewardship
Using the rubric, determine how well the Airman demonstrates responsible
management of assigned resources, which may include time, equipment, people, funds,
and/or facilities.
2
Accountability
Using the rubric, determine how well the Airman takes responsibility for the actions
and behaviors of self and/or team; demonstrates reliability and transparency.
SECTION IV: IMPROVING THE UNIT
I
T
E
M
A
B
Heading
Instructions
1
Decision Making
Using the rubric, determine how well the Airman makes well-informed, effective, and
timely decisions under one’s control that weigh constraints, risks, and benefits.
2
Innovation
Using the rubric, determine how well the Airman thinks creatively about different
ways to solve problems, implements improvements, and demonstrates calculated risk-
taking.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 77
Chapter 3
OFFICER PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS/OFFICER ALQ EVALUATIONS
3.1. General Guidelines. See Chapter 1 for general processing guidance applicable to all
evaluations.
3.2. Purpose.
3.2.1. Evaluation ratings are used to document performance and potential as well as provide
information for making a promotion recommendation, selection, or propriety action; selective
continuation; involuntary separation; selective early retirement; assignment; school
nomination and selection; and other management decisions. Therefore, evaluators at all levels
must use caution to prevent inflation; it is important to distinguish performance among peers
and is a disservice to all officers when evaluation ratings are inflated. Note: Commanders
are held responsible for the command climate (refer to paragraph 1.8.9.2) and overall
readiness of their unit and are ultimately accountable for its performance. As such, overall
command climate, readiness and performance shall be a major contributing factor when
assessing a commander’s performance. (T-0)
3.2.2. Marking Ratings (wet signatures only). When electronic ratings are not used, enter
hand-marked ratings after signing the evaluation to prevent erroneous entry of ratings by other
personnel. When hand-marking, use only reproducible dark blue or black ink.
3.3. Who Requires an Officer Evaluation/Officer Performance Brief.
3.3.1. All RegAF and ARC colonels (except brigadier general selects) and below not being
evaluated using an AF Form 475 (see paragraph 6.1), or as specified in paragraph 3.4 will
receive an evaluation as of the established SCOD for their current or select grade (see Table
3.4 and Table 3.5). (T-1)
3.3.2. Any officer being released from RegAF to the ARC (participating or non-participating)
if there have been 60 calendar days or more since the close out of the last officer evaluation.
Reason for the report is DBH.
3.3.3. (USSF Only) Any officer being separated from Space Force to transfer to a Sister
Service’s regular or reserve component if there have been 60 calendar days or more since the
close out of the last officer evaluation. Reason for the report is DBH.
3.3.4. Officers placed in prisoner status, appellate leave, or who are in absent without leave
status.
3.3.5. Officers whose separation or retirement is withdrawn. An evaluation is due if the
officer’s separation or retirement is withdrawn or cancelled.
3.3.5.1. (RegAF and ARC only) If the original SCOD has not passed, then it will remain
the same. (T-1) If the original SCOD has passed, an evaluation must be accomplished
within 60 days of when the withdrawn or cancelled action is complete. (T-1) The SCOD
remains the same and the reason will remain annual/biennial. (T-1)
3.3.5.2. (USSF only) If the original projected close-out date has not passed, then it will
remain the same. (T-1) If the original projected close-out date has passed, the close-out
date will be the date of the official withdrawal, cancellation, or as soon as the rater has 120
78 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
calendar days of supervision, whichever occurs first. (T-1) The reason for the evaluation
is annual.
3.3.6. (USSF only) Officers filling an authorized 365-day extended deployment billet who
have at least 120 calendar days of supervision prior to departing for the deployment. See
paragraph 3.9.
3.4. Who is Not Authorized, Unless Stated Below, an Officer Evaluation/ALQ Evaluation
3.4.1. Deployed commanders. Use a DAF Form 77.
3.4.2. Brigadier General selects. See Chapter 7.
3.4.3. AFR officers in a non-pay status PAS Code: S7XXXXX).
3.4.4. Officers who are in full-time student (functional category: L) or patient status.
3.4.5. Officers in the Wounded Warrior or Career Intermission Programs.
3.4.6. Individuals who died on active duty; however, if the death occurred on or after the close-
out date of an evaluation that was already being processed, it becomes an optional evaluation.
3.4.7. Separation or Retirement.
3.4.7.1. (RegAF and ARC only) Annual evaluations are optional for officers with an
approved separation or retirement date that is within one year after the SCOD. If an officer
is promotion eligible (in-the-promotion zone (IPZ) and first time above-the-promotion
zone (APZ)), then an evaluation is required. (T-1) See paragraph 3.4.7.3.
3.4.7.2. (USSF only) When the criteria under paragraph 3.4.8 (retirement) or 3.4.9
(separation) are met, an annual evaluation becomes optional. The rater may opt to write
an evaluation, and the ratee may request an evaluation be written.
3.4.7.3. Supervisors will consult with separating or retiring officers regarding the option
to complete a final evaluation. (T-3) Leadership shall consider the member’s preference
when deciding whether to accomplish their final evaluation. (T-3) After consulting with
the individual, and the individual opts not to complete a final evaluation, the supervisor
will annotate the evaluation with:
3.4.7.3.1. (RegAF and ARC only) “FINAL REPORT NOT REQUIRED AND/OR
IS NOT MANDATED TO BE RENDERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH DAFI 36-
2406, PARA 1.8,” in the first rater’s assessment block (“Executing the Mission”) and
“THIS SECTION NOT USED,” in the remaining rater and HLR assessment blocks;
process the evaluation through the rater and HLR for signature. (T-1)
3.4.7.3.2. (USSF) “FINAL REPORT NOT REQUIRED OR RENDERED AND/OR
IS NOT MANDATED TO BE RENDERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH DAFI 36-
2406, PARA 1.8,” in the rater’s assessment section of the AF Form 707; process the
evaluation to the lowest level commander for signature. (T-1)
3.4.7.4. Members are encouraged to complete a final evaluation for future purposes (e.g.,
employment, transfer into another AF component, or Sister Service). An evaluation will
not be accomplished after a member has officially separated or retired. (T-1)
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 79
3.4.8. Officers with an approved retirement date, provided all the following criteria below are
met:
3.4.8.1. The approved retirement date is within one year of the projected SCOD, annual,
or biennial close-out date of the evaluation. Example: If the approved retirement date is
1 Jun 20, and if the close-out date is 1 Jun 19 or later, no evaluation is required. However,
if the close-out date is 31 May 19 or earlier, then an evaluation is required.
3.4.8.2. The retirement application was approved prior to the projected SCOD, annual, or
biennial close-out date. Example: If the close-out date is 1 Jun 19, and the retirement
application was approved on 1 June 19 or earlier, no evaluation is required. However, if
the retirement application was not approved until 2 Jun 19 or later, then an evaluation is
required.
3.4.8.3. The officer will not be considered for promotion, selective continuation, or
selective early retirement by a HAF or HSF central selection board or a Reserve of the Air
Force (ResAF) selection board before retirement.
3.4.9. Officers with an approved separation date, provided the following criteria below are
met:
3.4.9.1. The officer voluntarily resigns their commission, has fulfilled their military
service obligation, and is not requesting or accepting a ResAF commission (RegAF
officers) or retaining a ResAF commission (Reserve officers) or transferring to another
service. Reminder—A DAF Form 77 is mandatory for anyone being released from RegAF
to the ANG or AFR under the PALACE CHASE or PALACE FRONT Programs. If
necessary, one bullet stating, “No report due to transition from DATE to DATE (inclusive
period),” may be used.
3.4.9.2. The officer is RegAF or USSF and voluntarily resigns their commission, or is a
Reserve officer, and is granted release from RegAF in lieu of action under DAFI 36-3211,
or court-martial. Note: The evaluation is mandatory following court-martial conviction.
3.4.9.3. The officer is involuntarily discharged or released from active duty under DAFI
36-3211 unless transferring to the ANG/AFR, or another service, e.g., Force Management.
3.4.10. (RegAF and ARC only) Officers attending formal education and training, provided
one of the following criteria is met:
3.4.10.1. An officer who receives an AF Form 475 from a formal training or education
course that was 20 weeks or more, and the form “to” date is within 120 days of the SCOD.
The officer will receive a report on the next SCOD for the appropriate grade.
3.4.10.2. Officers attending formal training or education over 20 weeks at the SCOD for
the officer’s grade. The AF Form 475 will be completed at course completion and an
evaluation will be required at the next SCOD.
3.5. When to Submit an Officer Evaluation/Officer Performance Brief.
3.5.1. For RegAF and ARC officers, see Table 3.2.
3.5.2. For USSF officers, see Table 3.3.
3.5.3. For general officer evaluations (RegAF, ARC, and USSF), see Chapter 7.
80 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
3.6. Annual Reports .
3.6.1. (RegAF and ARC only) Officers’ reports will close out on the appropriate SCOD for
the officers’ grades. (T-1) For an officer who enters active duty, the first evaluation will be
required at the next SCOD for their respective grade, given there are at least 180 days between
the EAD and the SCOD. (T-1) For officers who receive an AF Form 475, see paragraph
3.4.10.
3.6.2. (USSF only) Officers’ reports will close out one year from the close-out date of the last
evaluation. (T-1) The first evaluation will close out one year minus one day from the extended
active duty date. (T-1) For example, if the officer’s extended active duty date is 15 Jun 18,
then the close-out date would be 14 Jun 19.
3.7. Change of Reporting Official Reports (including emergencies or no-notice departures).
3.7.1. (RegAF and ARC only) Change of Reporting Official (CRO) reports are not
authorized for any grade.
3.7.2. (USSF only) Use the day before the effective date of the change for the close-out date.
3.7.3. (USSF only) When the rater or ratee is pending separation, retirement, or PCS, the
close-out date will be 30 calendar days before the projected departure date, unless:
3.7.3.1. (USSF only) The 30-day rule will cause a ratee to be ineligible for an evaluation
due to a lack of supervision. (T-1) Then the close-out date must be adjusted to the date on
which the rater achieves the required number of days of supervision, but no later than one
day before the departure date. (T-1) If the rater does not have the required supervision by
the day before the departure date, a report is not required.
3.7.3.2. (USSF only) Approved by the commander, to record significant events. Then
adjust the close-out date accordingly. Significant events are things such as DAF or Space
Force-level awards or derogatory information resulting in a referral evaluation, not simply
additional daily achievements. However, the adjusted close-out date must be before the
projected departure date, and this only applies to change of reporting official reports. (T-1)
3.7.4. (USSF only) Change of reporting official evaluations resulting from a ratee’s, or
rater’s, deployment are waived provided the ratee has received an evaluation within 180
calendar days of the deployment date and the ratee’s performance is not of a referral nature.
3.8. Directed by HAF, HSF, NGB, or Commander (MAJCOM, FLDCOM, wing, delta,
group, or squadron, as appropriate).
3.8.1. Message-Directed. Use the date specified in the message directing the evaluation.
3.8.2. Missing-in-Action/Captured/Detained. Use the date the ratee was placed in missing-in-
action, captured, or detained in captive status.
3.8.3. Control Roster Placement. Use one day before being placed on the control roster if the
evaluation is directed as a result of placement on the control roster.
3.8.4. Control Roster Removal. Use one day before expiration and/or removal from the
control roster if directed as a result of being removed or upon completion of the control roster
observation period.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 81
3.8.5. Otherwise Directed. Use the date as otherwise directed by the commander. See Tables
3.2 and 3.3.
3.8.6. (RegAF and ARC only) Directed by Commander (DBC). The close-out date will be
established by the unit commander that directed the evaluation. (T-1) DBC evaluations
provide flexibility to commanders to document substandard performance between SCODs as
an embedded report at the SCODs and will only contain comments and/or ratings regarding
the reason(s) for the evaluation. (T-1) All other comments, specifically those that are positive,
and promotion recommendations are not authorized and will be documented on the next SCOD
evaluation. (T-1)
3.9. 365-day Extended Deployment Officer Evaluations/Officer Performance Briefs. Note:
These instructions apply only to members selected to fill an official Extended Deployment
requirement. Do not use these instructions for members filling other requirements, even though
they may be extended to or beyond 365 calendar days.
3.9.1. (For RegAF and ARC only) A change of reporting official to the deployment location
will occur. (T-1) The deployed rating chain will complete evaluations on their ratees at the
SCOD if the ratee is assigned to the deployed location as of the established accounting date.
(T-1) See paragraph 3.9.4.3. Note: The senior rater matched to the ratee’s home station PAS
code must perform senior rater duties for PRFs. (T-1)
3.9.2. Home Station Rating Chain Responsibilities:
3.9.2.1. Prior to Departure:
3.9.2.1.1. (USSF only) If there has been at least 120 calendar days of supervision, the
home station CSS/HR specialist will generate a change of reporting official evaluation.
(T-1). If there has been less than 120 calendar days of supervision, but it has been more
than one year since the member’s last evaluation, only 60 calendar days of supervision
will trigger and annual evaluation. (T-1)
3.9.2.1.2. (RegAF and ARC) The home station rater should provide input to the
deployed rater on the ratee’s performance at home station during the reporting period
prior to the ratee’s departure. The deployed rater may use the information when
preparing the annual evaluation, but it is not required.
3.9.2.1.3. If the deployed rater is known prior to departure, the CSS/HR specialist will
update the deployed rater. (T-1) When the rater is unknown, use the home station
commander as a temporary rater. This will facilitate a direct line of communication
between home station and deployed commanders to ensure the rating chain is
established. Example: If the data is not updated immediately, a feedback notification
will generate within 30 calendar days, and that should remind the commander that the
deployed data needs to be updated. (T-1)
3.9.2.2. Upon Arrival in the Area of Responsibility. The home station CSS/HR specialist
will coordinate with the deployed PERSCO team and update MilPDS to reflect the
member’s deployed duty title and DAFSC or DFSCS effective the date the member arrives
in the area of responsibility. (T-1) They will also update the deployed rater if the rater was
unknown prior to departure. (T-1)
82 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
3.9.2.2.1. Duty Title Format. All extended deployment personnel duty titles will be
standardized to reflect the extended deployment “duty title/country” assigned. (T-1) If
space allows, include the unit assigned. Example: “Commander, 442 ECS/Iraq” or
“Comm Mentor, Geographically Separated Unit/Afghanistan.”
3.9.2.2.2. When determining the deployed rating chain, the rater should be the person
who directly supervises the member’s day-to-day activities. The unit that owns the unit
line number will determine the rating chain. (T-3) Raters may be in any United States
or foreign military service or a civilian in a supervisory position and must be in a grade
equal to or higher than the ratee. (T-1) In accordance with 10 USC § 9013, Secretary
of the Air Force, DAFI 51-509, and Joint Publication 1, Doctrine for the Armed Forces
of the United States, the Secretary of the Air Force (SecAF) is responsible for the
administrative control (ADCON) and support of DAF forces assigned or attached to
combatant commands. (T-0) ADCON is the authority necessary to fulfill SecAF’s
statutory responsibilities for administration and support. In joint environments, an Air
Force or Space Force unit will be designated to have ADCON responsibilities over
Airmen and Guardians. (T-1) ADCON responsibility does not necessarily extend to
writing the evaluations on those attached to the Air Force or Space Force unit for
ADCON purposes.
3.9.2.3. (USSF only) Upon Return from the Area of Responsibility. The home station
senior rater/commander will continue to complete the commander’s review/reviewer’s
(senior rater) portion of all evaluations, including those completed by the deployed rating
chain. (T-1)
3.9.2.4. Senior Rater Responsibilities. Home station senior raters will prepare a PRF for
promotion-eligible officers (officers will be on the home station senior rater’s master
eligibility list [MEL] and [RegAF only] will meet respective MLR). (T-1)
3.9.2.5. Interrogators Training Report (TR). Officers who attend the Interrogator training
program will receive a TR upon graduation from the course. (T-1) The 314 TRS/CC will
sign all TRs. (T-1) These TRs (officer and enlisted) will be updated in MilPDS. (T-1)
The start date will be based upon the previous evaluation close-out date, and the end date
will be based upon the graduation date. (T-1)
3.9.3. PERSCO Team Responsibilities. The owning PERSCO team will be responsible for
tracking the evaluations on all deployed personnel filling extended deployment billets. (T-1)
3.9.4. Deployed Rating Chain Responsibilities.
3.9.4.1. MilPDS Updates. Ensure the home station has updated MilPDS to reflect DAFSC
or DSFSC, duty title and deployed rater.
3.9.4.2. Performance Feedback. Perform initial and mid-term feedback in accordance with
Chapter 2.
3.9.4.3. Evaluations. The deployed rater (and subsequent evaluator[s]) will render an
evaluation on an officer, under the following circumstances:
3.9.4.3.1. (RegAF and ARC only) On the ratee’s established SCOD if the member is
assigned to the deployed location as of the SCOD accounting date. See paragraph
1.4.8.1.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 83
3.9.4.3.2. (AFR only) Raters will submit biennial evaluations at the appropriate
SCOD if two years have passed since the close-out date of the last evaluation (see
Table 3.2.).
3.9.4.3.3. (USSF only) If an annual evaluation becomes due while deployed and the
deployed rater has had at least 120 calendar days of supervision. (T-1). If the deployed
rater has not had 120 calendar days of supervision, the close-out date will be extended
out to where there will be 120 calendar days of supervision. (T-1). If an annual
evaluation was accomplished earlier in the deployment, and there has been at least 60
calendar days but less than 120 calendar days of supervision by the time the member
departs, an informal Letter of Evaluation will be prepared. (T-1). Home station and
deployed commanders will ensure a direct line of communication to the deployed rating
chain is established to preclude evaluations not being completed at the deployed
location. (T-1)
3.9.4.3.4. (USSF only) If the deployed rater changes after 120 calendar days of
supervision, a change of reporting official evaluation must be completed. (T-1) Note:
Multiple evaluations may result and are authorized under these circumstances.
3.9.4.3.5. (USSF only) If the ratee is returned early or the deployed rater changes prior
to completing 120 calendar days of supervision, an informal LOE is required. 60
calendar days minimum of supervision is required. (T-1)
3.9.4.3.6. (USSF only) If the individual is an officer filling a commander’s billet, an
officer evaluation versus the formal deployed commander LOE will be required. (T-1)
3.9.4.3.7. ANG and AFR officers ordered to extended active duty under 10 U.S.C. §
12304 (other than during war or national emergency) or under 10 U.S.C. § 12302,
continue to receive officer evaluations according to Table 3.2 and Table 3.6. Officers
ordered to extended active duty under 10 U.S.C. § 12301(a) (war or national
emergency) receive evaluations under the RegAF list provisions in this instruction.
3.9.4.4. Evaluation Form. For instructions on completing the AF Form 707, see Table 3.1
or officer ALQ evaluation, see Table 3.6.
3.9.4.4.1. (RegAF and ARC only) The deployed rating chain is responsible for
completing the evaluation, to include the deployed HLR.
3.9.4.4.2. (USSF only) The deployed rating chain is responsible for completing the
evaluation through the additional rater. Provide recommended comments for the
reviewer when applicable.
3.9.4.4.3. (USSF only) Forward the evaluation to the home station rating chain for
completion.
3.9.4.5. (USSF only) Two General Officers in Rating Chain. Currently paragraph
1.4.12.3.4.1 prohibits multiple general officers from serving as evaluators on performance
evaluations. See paragraph 1.7.1.7 for exceptions.
3.9.4.5.1. Deployed General Officer Raters. Evaluation will qualify for a single
evaluator, and no additional rater or HLR will be required. (T-1) (USSF only)
Complete rater block and forward evaluation to the home station senior rater.
84 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
3.9.4.5.2. (USSF Only) Home Station Rating Chain. If one of the following
situations apply, enter the applicable mandatory statement in the feedback comment
section of the evaluation.
3.9.4.5.2.1. (USSF only) Evaluations signed by a deployed general officer and the
home station senior rater is a general officer. See paragraph 1.7.1.7.
3.9.4.5.2.2. (USSF only) Evaluations signed by a deployed officer who outranks
the home station senior rater. See paragraph 1.7.1.6.
3.9.4.5.3. (USSF only) Deployed General Officer Additional Raters.
3.9.4.5.3.1. Provide recommended comments for the reviewer (senior rater) when
applicable.
3.9.4.5.3.2. Complete the additional rater block and forward to the home station
senior rater/unit commander.
3.9.5. Evaluations rendered in the combat zone or at noncombat ports and MPFs. All
provisions of this instruction remain in effect, except:
3.9.5.1. (USSF only) Authorities waive change of reporting official evaluations resulting
from the deployment to the combat zone, provided the ratee has received an evaluation
within 180 calendar days of the deployment date and the ratee’s performance meets
minimum standards.
3.9.5.2. (USSF only) For ratees not meeting minimum standards, prepare a referral
evaluation and process it according to paragraph 1.10.
3.9.6. Evaluator Requirements and Procedures for Officer Evaluations.
3.9.6.1. Minimum grade requirements for senior raters, reviewers, and HLRs remain
unchanged. See paragraph 1.5.
3.9.6.2. Rater. See paragraph 1.5. The rater cannot be substituted for any reason other
than those outlined in paragraph 1.7.
3.9.6.3. (RegAF and ARC only) Higher Level Reviewer. The HLR for members on 365-
day deployments will be deployed HLRs who meet criteria in paragraph 1.5.2.5. (T-1)
Air Expeditionary Wing commanders in 365-day extended deployment status are
authorized as HLRs for officers on 365-day extended deployments to the respective AEW.
(T-1)
3.9.6.4. Single Evaluator.
3.9.6.4.1. (RegAF and ARC only) Air Expeditionary Wing commanders/equivalents
in 365-day extended deployment status are authorized as single evaluators if they are
the primary rater and HLR. If a rater meets the HLR requirements in paragraph
3.9.6.3, but is not an AEW/CC, the rater’s rater must be the HLR. (T-1)
3.9.6.4.2. (USSF only) If the rater is also the reviewer, leave Section V, Additional
Rater’s Overall Assessment, blank and include the following statement in Section VI,
Reviewer’s comments block: “THE RATER IS ALSO THE REVIEWER.” The rater
digitally signs the rater, additional rater, and reviewer blocks (signature elements are
optional). If the officer evaluation additional rater is also the reviewer, enter the
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 85
additional rater’s comments in Section V, Additional Rater Overall Assessment, and
include the following statement in Section VI, Reviewer’s comments block: “THE
ADDITIONAL RATER IS ALSO THE REVIEWER.” The additional rater signs both
the additional rater and reviewer block.
3.9.6.5. (USSF only) “In-place” Additional Rater.
3.9.6.5.1. Commanders may authorize the next evaluator in the rating chain (the
additional rater’s rater) or “in-place” additional rater to assume the responsibilities of
the additional rater when the additional rater is unable to perform evaluator duties due
to deployment. When this occurs, Section V must include a statement explaining why
the original additional rater did not prepare the evaluation (Example: additional rater
deployed as of close-out date). (T-1) Note: The “in-place” additional rater is defined
as the person responsible for the original additional rater’s normal day-to-day duties.
To endorse the evaluation, this individual must still meet additional rater grade
requirements as defined in paragraph 1.5.2.2. (T-1)
3.9.6.5.2. When the squadron or group commander is deployed and is the additional
rater or completes the commander review, the temporary commander (on G-series
orders) may serve as the additional rater or complete the commander review. An officer
cannot serve as an "acting commander" and/or be identified or described as an "acting
commander" on an evaluation. Either the officer is a commander on G-Series orders,
or the officer is not a commander (whether by title or description). In order to document
an officer filling the position in the commander's absence, use examples such as "served
as commander for three separate weeks" or "assumed commander duties for 6 months"
or "filled in as commander five separate weeks.”
3.9.6.6. (USSF only) For deployed Senior Raters. Vice wing or vice delta commanders
may assume the responsibilities of a deployed senior rater/wing/delta commander for
Officer Evaluation System forms only when placed on G-series orders and designated by
the management level as the senior rater.
3.9.6.7. Comments are mandatory when there is significant disagreement with the
previous evaluator. Evaluators must make specific comments to justify referral ratings.
3.9.7. Referral Evaluation Procedures. Use referral procedures in paragraph 1.10. When the
ratee is deployed in support of a contingency operation, ratee comments on the referral
evaluation must reach the next evaluator no later than 30 calendar days after receipt of the
referral letter. (T-1) Type, handwrite, or print referral correspondence in dark blue or black
ink.
3.9.8. Routing Evaluations.
3.9.8.1. Performance evaluations are due to the servicing MPF or personnel activity 30
calendar days after close-out, and to the office of record 60 calendar days after close-out.
3.9.8.2. Forward evaluations directed under Table 3.2. or Table 3.3 to arrive at HQ AFPC
or HQ ARPC (as appropriate) by the suspense date provided in the directing letter.
3.9.8.3. Forward evaluations in a sealed envelope clearly marked, OFFICER
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION DATA--TO BE OPENED BY ADDRESSEE ONLY.
86 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
3.9.8.4. Alternate Routing Procedures. Some crisis conditions may result in temporary
changes to routing procedures. If this occurs, units will receive specific instructions. (T-1)
3.9.9. Quality Control Review. Quality control of the appearance of performance evaluations
may relax, but the content and data contained must be accurate. (T-1) Evaluations prepared
under wartime provisions may be handwritten.
3.10. “FROM” Dates. Use the “FROM” date on the evaluation notice, but if different or
incorrect, use the information below to establish the “FROM” date. If the officer is:
3.10.1. On extended active duty, and it is the first evaluation: use the extended active duty
date; or the day following the close-out date of a TR from a school that is 20 weeks or more.
3.10.2. An ANG officer not on extended active duty and it is an initial evaluation: use the
effective date of federal recognition in ANG or the day following the close-out of a TR from a
school of 20 weeks or more. Note: Use DAF Form 77 to cover any gap from the officer’s
entry into non-extended active duty status to the “FROM” date of the first evaluation received
in non-extended active duty status in accordance with paragraph 1.14 and DAFI 36-2608,
Military Personnel Records System.
3.10.3. An ANG officer not on extended active duty and was assigned to an ANG unit from
ARPC, use the date of the latest federal recognition. Complete an DAF Form 77 to cover a
gap caused by insufficient supervision in accordance with paragraph 1.14 and DAFI 36-2608.
3.10.4. For an ANG officer not on extended active duty and was assigned to an ANG unit
from another state: use the date of the latest federal recognition (the losing state will complete
an DAF Form 77 to cover a gap caused by insufficient supervision in accordance with
paragraph 1.14 and DAFI 36-2608).
3.10.5. An AFR officer not on extended active duty and it is an initial evaluation, or the officer
has been reassigned from the IRR: use the date of assignment.
3.10.6. An AFR officer not on extended active duty but previously on extended active duty
and concurrently assigned to training category A, B, or E on release from active duty: use the
day following the close-out of the last evaluation received while on extended active duty.
(Applies only to the first non-extended active duty-status evaluation.)
3.10.7. An AFR officer not on extended active duty but previously on active duty as RegAF
and did not accept an AFR commission concurrently with release from active duty: use the
effective date of appointment in non-extended active duty status. (Applies only to the first
non-extended active duty-status evaluation.) Use DAF Form 77 to cover any gap from the
officer’s entry into non-extended active duty status to the “FROM” date of the first evaluation
received in non-extended active duty status in accordance with paragraph 1.14 and DAFI 36-
2608.
3.10.8. (RegAF and ARC only) If an officer received a TR for a school that is 20 weeks or
more, use the day following the close-out day of the TR. This may result in an evaluation over
12 months.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 87
3.11. “THRU” Dates.
3.11.1. (RegAF and ANG only) The “THRU” date will be the appropriate SCOD unless the
reason for the report falls under paragraph 3.8. (T-1)
3.11.2. (AFR only) The “thru” date for an annual report will be the appropriate SCOD as
long as the member earns at least 16 points. (T-1) If the officer does not earn 16 points by the
SCOD, submit an administrative LOE for a gap report.
3.11.3. (USSF only) Never close out an evaluation on or after the actual departure, retirement,
or separation date of the rater or ratee. If a departure, separation, or retirement date changes
after establishment of the “THRU” date of evaluation, it is not necessary to adjust the close-
out date if it is no more than 30 calendar days before the actual departure date. Evaluations
prepared and made a matter of record under the change of reporting official rule remain valid
even if the condition is later canceled.
3.12. Number of Days of Supervision.
3.12.1. Enter the number of days the rater supervised the ratee during the reporting period. To
compute, use the “supervision began date” through the “close-out date” to determine the
number of days of supervision.
3.12.2. Deduct the number of days during non-rated periods authorized in accordance with
paragraph 1.4.11. Do not deduct any periods of leave, TDY, absences or periods loaned out
to other organizations unless they occur during an unauthorized non-rated period.
3.12.3. If, while on extended active duty an officer evaluation is being written by the rater’s
rater per paragraph 1.7, then enter the number of days that the evaluator had personal or
written knowledge of the ratee's duty performance during the reporting period.
3.12.4. If a non-extended active duty ANG officer’s ALQ evaluation is being written by
another rater per paragraph 1.7, then enter the number of days the evaluator had personal or
written knowledge of the ratee’s duty performance during the reporting period. The number
of days of supervision for a ratee assigned to a rater for a calendar year is 365, not the sum of
unit training assembly and field training days.
3.12.5. If a non-extended active duty AFR officer, then enter the number of days of
supervision under the rater during the reporting period. Deduct from the period of supervision
tours of active duty under other than the designated rater for which there is a LOE. Example:
If preparing an officer ALQ evaluation to cover the period from 1 July to 31 December and
the rater was first so designated on 1 September and served in this capacity without a break to
31 December, and the ratee reported for training and duty for a total of 27 days between 1
September and 31 December, then the period of supervision is 122 days, not 27 days. The
rater is responsible for the accuracy of the number of days of supervision entry.
88 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
3.13. Performance Feedback Assessment.
3.13.1. Performance feedback assessments will be accomplished in accordance with Chapter
2.
3.13.2. The rater certifies the performance feedback assessment in myEval (RegAF and ARC)
by acknowledging whether feedback was conducted, or in Section III of the AF Form 707
(USSF) by entering the date the performance feedback assessment was provided during the
rating period. This includes the midterm feedback, or any subsequent feedback sessions
requested by the ratee. If the performance feedback assessment was not accomplished, an
explanation must be provided in myEval (RegAF and ARC) or on the AF Form 707 (USSF).
3.14. Reviewer/Higher Level Reviewer.
3.14.1. The reviewer/HLR is the highest-level endorser in the ratee's rating chain. For USSF,
the senior rater must be in the grade of at least a colonel or civilian equivalent (GS-15/NH-IV)
or higher, serving as a wing/delta commander or equivalent and designated by the management
level. For RegAF and ARC, see paragraph 1.5.2.5 for HLR requirements. For USSF, see
paragraph 1.5.2.6 for reviewer requirements.
3.14.2. The reviewer/HLR will concur or non-concur by making the appropriate selection.
See paragraph 1.9 for disagreements.
3.14.3. (USSF only) The reviewer may comment only under the following circumstances:
3.14.3.1. If the reviewer disagrees with the evaluation. The rater and additional rater are
first given an opportunity to change the evaluation; however, they will not change their
evaluation just to satisfy the reviewer. If the evaluation remains unchanged and the
reviewer still disagrees, the reviewer marks the non-concur block and provides rationale in
the space provided. A DAF Form 77 can be added if additional space is required. See
paragraph 1.9.
3.14.3.2. If the evaluation is a referral, and the reviewer is the evaluator named in Section
XI of the AF Form 707, or the reviewer refers the evaluation. See paragraph 1.10.
3.14.3.3. If the ratee is a colonel or colonel select. When the reviewer is not also the rater
or additional rater, they may make, if desired and appropriate, command and/or assignment
recommendations in Section VI, Reviewer’s Comments Block, without non-concurring
with the evaluation. Promotion recommendations and other comments are not allowed.
3.14.3.4. If the reviewer is also the rater or additional rater. See paragraph 3.9.6.3,
mandatory comments.
3.14.4. Single Evaluator only.
3.14.4.1. (RegAF and ARC officer) Only officers who are designated as a senior rater
by the management level may serve as both the rater and the HLR. If the primary rater
meets HLR requirements but is not a senior rater, the next rater up the rating chain must be
the HLR. (T-1)
3.14.4.2. (USSF only) An evaluator must be a colonel or GS-15/NH-IV (or equivalent).
If the rater is a senior rater, the evaluation must close-out at this level unless it is a referral
evaluation. The evaluator must meet both grade requirements and evaluator requirements
for each section of the applicable evaluation form.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 89
3.15. Stratifications. Stratifications serve to provide clear feedback to ratees on their overall
performance in relation to a relevant peer group with similar knowledge, skills, experience, and
scope of work and responsibility, and to document that performance assessment for future unit-
level and enterprise-level talent management decisions (e.g., special application boards, hiring
authorities, assignment and development teams, promotion boards).
3.15.1. Stratification Accountability. It is the responsibility of evaluators at all levels to
maintain integrity and keep intact the purpose, clarity, and validity of officer stratifications.
(USSF only) Evaluators should only use stratification numerators approximately once per 12-
month period. Stratification denominators will fluctuate with manning changes. Evaluators
using the same stratification statements (e.g., numerator, authorized peer group) for different
officers within a 6-12 month period should be rare and only done under exceptional
circumstances.
3.15.2. Statements outside the Scope of Responsibility. Stratification and broad statements
outside the scope of the evaluator’s responsibility or knowledge are prohibited. (T-1) A broad
statement is one which implies knowledge of Air Force or Space Force members not in the
everyday chain of accountability, both mission and personal. Evaluators can only stratify
personnel within the confines of their direct rating chain and/or scope of rating responsibility
(e.g., within the SRID; AEW/CCs without a SRID may still stratify within their entire wing).
As an example of inappropriate and prohibited scope, an evaluator may not include in their
stratification pools (denominators) personnel who provide mission support via a cross-
functional team, or are on temporary duty status supporting a mission, but are permanently
assigned to another unit (PASCODE) since these personnel do not officially report in the
evaluator’s chain. Exception: Personnel deployed in designated 365-day extended
deployment billets as of the SCOD accounting date will be included in their deployed rating
chain’s stratification pool; these members will not be included in their home unit’s
stratification pool since the deployed unit is completing their evaluation.
3.15.3. Stratification statements, when authorized, are not mandatory and are limited to the
scope of the rating period (start date to end date). Accordingly, evaluators may review past
evaluations; however, evaluators may not reference past evaluations in any way, and also may
not use past evaluations as context or determinant for any current rating period stratification(s)
or content in performance statements or HLR/reviewer comments. The omission of
stratifications does not constitute an error or injustice. Note: An evaluator may remove or
change a stratification at any point during the process of an evaluation.
3.15.4. (RegAF and ARC only) Stratification statements are only authorized within the
designated stratification sections in myEval and the AF Form 715 (use of this form is only
allowable when authorized by waiver as provided at paragraph 1.13.4. (T-1) Evaluators are
prohibited from placing any form of stratification statement(s) in either an ALQ performance
statement section or HLR assessment comment section, to include stratifications from other
evaluators (e.g., deployed stratifications) and veiled stratifications (see paragraph 3.15.6.2).
(T-1) Stratifications and all deployed/TDY performance is authorized for the evaluator
consideration in overall assessment and home station stratification. Stratifications provided on
an AF Form 77, may be used by the rater for consideration when completing the ALQ
evaluation, but may not be quoted or otherwise included.
90 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
3.15.5. (RegAF and ARC only) Single Evaluator Stratifications. Raters serving as a single
evaluator are prohibited from entering a stratification in the rater’s stratification block and must
select “This Section Not Used.” Authorized stratifications may be entered in the HLR’s
stratification block of the officer evaluation and must comply with paragraph 3.15.7.4. (T-1)
3.15.6. Unauthorized Stratifications.
3.15.6.1. Company Grade Officers (CGOs) and/or Field Grade Officers (FGOs) are not
authorized peer groups for primary or secondary stratification purposes. (T-1)
3.15.6.2. Veiled stratifications are not authorized. These are statements which imply a
stratification but do not conform to the guidance within paragraphs 3.15 and 3.16 (e.g. “#1
CAG Advisor…” This is an inappropriate evaluator comment because it is a veiled
stratification with no denominator).
3.15.6.3. Stratification statements based on awards are not authorized, as awards are
recognition based on a given set of criteria (e.g., “#1/50 as Sq CGO of the Quarter” is
prohibited). (T-1)
3.15.6.4. Stratification statements for second lieutenants (O-1s) are prohibited. (T-1)
While this quantitative comparison against a peer group is prohibited, evaluators should
provide these officers with clear feedback regarding their performance in relation to Air
Force or Space Force standards and (RegAF and ARC only) major performance areas (i.e.,
executing the mission, leading people, managing resources, improving the unit).
3.15.6.5. (AFR Only) It is strictly prohibited to place a stratification referencing a
member’s placement on a key personnel list and other Development Team vectors on an
evaluation.
3.15.6.6. Promotion “Selects.” (RegAF and AFR only) A primary stratification is not
authorized for officers on a promotion select list. Officers on a promotion select list may
be considered in denominator pools for grade stratifications on the SCOD of the lower
(current) grade. See the exception at paragraph 3.15.7.3.1. (T-1) (ANG only) Officers
on a promotion select list will be stratified against other officers in their current grade (e.g.,
a lieutenant colonel select will be stratified against all other majors). (T-1) (USSF only)
Once a USSF officer is selected for promotion, they will only be stratified against others
selected for promotion to the same grade (e.g., a major select will only be stratified against
other major selects). (T-1)
3.15.6.7. Stratification Quotes. The use of stratification statements from anyone other than
the evaluator is prohibited, unless (RegAF and ARC only) they are between the rater and
the HLR in the rating scope of responsibility (e.g., a wing commander may not quote a
NAF commander’s stratification; however, a wing commander may quote a group
commander’s stratification if the group commander is not the rater). (T-1) USSF
Exceptions: (1) Senior rater/senior leader stratification may be quoted if they are a
signatory on the officer evaluation and do not have a requirement to provide comments
(e.g., reviewer), (2) an evaluator (must be a signatory) may stratify at a level below, as long
as it is within their scope of rating responsibility, (3) stratification from a deployed wing
or delta commander/equivalent or higher level evaluator who is not a signatory on the
evaluation and the evaluation is signed by the deployed rater, additional rater, and home
station senior rater is authorized, and (4), optional deployed LOE stratifications may be
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 91
quoted in future evaluations as long as stratification meets the criteria described in this
guidance and is not previously documented in the permanent record.
3.15.6.8. When stratifying officers on officer evaluations, evaluators will not consider
completion/non-completion of non-resident developmental education or officer
professional military education (OPME) if the officer is on the school select list or
select/candidate status (because the ratee will attend in-residence). Relative ranking among
officers rated by the rating chain should be based on overall performance. This paragraph
does not preclude raters from making appropriate assignment and developmental education
or OPME recommendations on officer evaluations and retention recommendation forms.
See paragraph 3.16.3.
3.15.7. Authorized Stratifications. When used, stratification statements must be written in
whole number quantitative terms (numerator over denominator) based on authorized peer
groups and must remain within the evaluator’s scope of authority. (T-1) Use of percentages
in the numerator are prohibited (e.g., cannot use “Top 5%/50”). Note: Stratification of officers
between components (RegAF, Reserve, Guard) is authorized within an evaluator’s scope of
authority as long as the stratification is within an authorized peer group. Authorized peer
groups are limited to the following categories (See Table 3.7.):
3.15.7.1. Primary Stratification. Evaluators may stratify officers by grade. Grade
stratifications will only include officers in the same grade (e.g., first lieutenants, captains,
majors, lieutenant colonels, and colonels). (T-1) Do not stratify officers against civilian
grades or include civilian “equivalents” in the denominator pool. (T-1) Primary
stratifications must include all military officers in that grade under the evaluator’s scope of
rating responsibility and may not include officers who are assigned within another HLR’s
(USAF) or reviewer’s (USSF) scope of rating responsibility.
3.15.7.1.1. United States Air Force or United States Space Force Officers. The
primary stratification for an officer assigned to a position in which only USAF or only
USSF officers are within an evaluator’s scope of rating authority will simply have the
grade as the descriptor (e.g., “#2/25 Lt Cols”). (T-1)
3.15.7.1.2. DAF Officers. The primary stratification for an officer assigned to a unit
in which both, and only, USAF and USSF officers of the same grade are within an
evaluator’s scope of rating authority must have “DAF” with the grade as the descriptor
(e.g., “#1/7 DAF Lt Cols”). (T-1) “Joint” as a stratification category is not authorized
among only USAF and USSF officers. (T-1)
3.15.7.1.3. Joint Officers. The primary stratification for an officer permanently
assigned to a position on a joint manning document in which at least one other non-
DAF officer is within an evaluator’s scope of rating authority must have “Joint” with
the grade as the descriptor (e.g., “#1/5 Joint Majs”). (T-1) Raters with USAF officers
and other sister service officers in the same grade, except those from USSF, are not
authorized to use any other stratification category than “Joint” as a primary
stratification (e.g., not authorized to state, “#1/4 USAF Lt Cols” to stratify just Air
Force), or to specify specific services (e.g., not authorized to state, “#1/6 USAF/DA Lt
Cols” to stratify just Air Force and Army, or “#2/5 USAF/USMC Majs” to stratify just
Air Force and Marines) even if there is only one other sister service represented in
addition to the USAF officers. Similarly, raters with USSF officers and other sister
92 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
service officers in the same grade, except those from USAF, are not authorized to use
any other stratification category than “Joint,” as a primary stratification (e.g., not
authorized to state, “#1/4 USSF Lt Cols” to stratify just Space Force), or to specify
specific services (e.g., not authorized to state “#1/6 USSF/DA Lt Cols” to stratify just
Space Force and Army, or “#2/5 USSF/USMC Majs” to stratify just Space Force and
Marines) even if there is only one other sister service represented in addition to the
USSF officers.
3.15.7.1.4. Service Component. The primary stratification for officers may have
service component (RegAF, Reserve, Guard) with the grade as a descriptor and must
be within the evaluator’s scope of authority (e.g., “#1/4 ANG Majs”).
3.15.7.1.5. Reserve Participation Category. The primary stratification for reserve
officers may have a Reserve Participation category (i.e., IMA, AGR, VLPAD, LEAD,
or EAD) with the grade as a descriptor and must be within the evaluator’s scope of
authority (e.g., “#1/6 IMA O-6s”; “#2/25 VLPAD Majs”). (T-1) Evaluators are
prohibited from stratifying using the participation category of ART, as these officers
are considered Traditional Reservists when evaluating their officer performance. (T-1)
3.15.7.1.6. (RegAF and USSF only) Frocked Officers. Frocked or temporarily
promoted officers will be stratified amongst the officers in the grade they have been
frocked or temporarily promoted to (e.g., a major that has been temporarily promoted
to lieutenant colonel will only be stratified amongst other lieutenant colonels; a
lieutenant colonel frocked to colonel will only be stratified against other colonels).
(T-1)
3.15.7.2. Secondary Stratification. In order to use a secondary stratification, the officer
must first earn a primary stratification in accordance with paragraph 3.15.7.1 on their
evaluation to ground the secondary stratification statement and communicate the clearest
depiction of where an officer stands for all future evaluation readers. Tertiary
stratifications and beyond are not authorized. An evaluator may use one of the following
peer groups as a secondary stratification:
3.15.7.2.1. Developmental Category. This refers to the officer’s developmental
category for promotion. Raters may use a developmental category stratification as a
secondary stratification to any primary grade stratification and must be used among
officers in the same grade (e.g., “#3/17 Capts, 1/12 LAF-C Capts;” “#5/16 Majs; #2/8
NC Majs;” “ #2/25 Lt Cols, #1/10 LSF-O Lt Cols”). Exception: Developmental
category stratifications are not authorized for USSF colonels.
3.15.7.2.2. United States Air Force Grade or United States Space Force Grade. Raters
may use a USAF or USSF grade stratification as a secondary stratification to a Joint or
DAF primary stratification and must be used among officers in the same grade (e.g.,
"#2/14 Joint Majs, #1/6 USAF Majs;” or “#3/16 DAF Lt Cols, #1/4 USSF Lt Cols”).
3.15.7.2.3. (RegAF and ARC only) Subordinate Echelon Grade. This refers to an
officer’s standing at established echelons (unit levels) organizationally subordinate to
the HLR, but organizationally senior to the rater within the HLR’s SRID, when the
subordinate echelon is not a signatory on the evaluation. Use of this a subordinate
echelon stratification is limited to grade within the subordinate echelon. As an
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 93
example, a wing commander may elect to stratify an officer amongst their peers in a
group subordinate to the wing (e.g., “#16/50 Majs, #4/22 MDG Majs;” “#23/90 Majs,
#6/25 WSA Majs”). (T-1)
3.15.7.2.4. Duty Position. This refers to the officer’s duty position type, level, and
scope of responsibility (e.g., commander, wing commander, section chiefs, flight
commanders, operations officers, branch chiefs, action officers, analysts, instructors,
combat systems officers, etc.). Officers may be stratified against civilian personnel in
equivalent duty positions (e.g., “#1/1 Capts, #1/40 Analysts”; “#2/6 Majs, #3/41 Flt
CCs”). Duty position stratifications by grade are not authorized (e.g., “#5/40 Majs,
#1/20 Maj Flight Commanders”), except for command position stratifications.
Command position stratifications by grade are authorized, if desired (e.g., “#4/35 Majs,
#2/6 Maj Sq/CCs;” “#3/60 Lt/Cols, #1/3 Lt Col Sq/CCs”). “Non-” duty position
stratifications and overly broad categorizations that obscure the differences in grade
and duty positions inherent within the stratification are not authorized (e.g., “#15/60,
#1/6 non-command Lt Cols;” “#20/90 Majs, #1/136 officers”). (T-1)
3.15.7.2.5. Air Force Reserve or Air National Guard Components. Raters may use
AFR or ANG grade as a secondary stratification to an authorized primary grade
stratification within an evaluator’s scope of authority and must be used among officers
in the same grade (e.g., #23/118 Lt Cols; #1/8 ANG Lt Cols). Raters may also use AFR
or ANG as a descriptor to a secondary stratification within an evaluator’s scope of
authority as long as the stratification is within an authorized peer group and must be
used among officers in the same grade (e.g., “#3/7 Majs; #1/3 AFR Analysts”).
3.15.7.3. (RegAF and AFR only) Authorized Exception to Primary and Secondary
Stratifications for Promotion “Selects.” Officers on a promotion select list may be
stratified using the secondary duty position stratification only without first using a primary
stratification without grade or select grade reference (e.g., “#1/8 Branch Chiefs;” “#3/7
Sq/CCs). Promotion “selects” may be considered in denominator pools for grade
stratifications on the SCOD of the lower (current) grade.
3.15.7.4. (RegAF and ARC only) Exceptions for Higher Level Reviewer Stratifications.
3.15.7.4.1. (RegAF and ARC only) HLR Stratification Scoping. The primary and
secondary stratification denominators for the HLR may not exceed the number of
evaluations signed by the HLR on that specific SCOD; however, if an HLR chooses to
include promotion selects to the next higher grade within their stratification pool for
the lower grade, their denominator may exceed the number of evaluations they sign for
that specific SCOD by the number added by the inclusion of promotion selects. Neither
primary nor secondary stratification denominators shall include all officers within an
HLR’s scope of responsibility unless the HLR is a signatory on the evaluations of all
officers within that scope. HLRs can only stratify personnel within the confines of
their scope of responsibility (e.g., SRID). Exception: For HLRs also evaluating non-
USAF officers (e.g., USSF, or any Joint officers), the HLR’s primary and secondary
stratification denominators may exceed the number of USAF officers at the SCOD but
still may not exceed the number of evaluations signed by the HLR for all their officers
of the same grade during their annual evaluation cycle.
94 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
3.15.7.4.2. (RegAF and ARC Only) When Ratee is Same Grade as Rater. When the
ratee is the same grade as the rater, the HLR has the option to stratify the ratee using
the secondary duty position stratification only, without first using a primary
stratification. This option offers some discretion to HLRs assessing performance of all
officers in a grade at the same time, particularly when a peer group includes officers
with varying scopes of responsibility (e.g., when a squadron commander and director
of operations (DO) are the same grade, the HLR has the option to stratify the ratee as
“#1/6 DOs” without using a primary stratification). (T-1)
3.16. Unauthorized Evaluator Considerations and Comments. Certain items are prohibited
for consideration in the performance evaluation process and will not be commented upon on any
Officer Evaluation System form (see Chapter 8 for RegAF and ARC members and Chapter 11
for USSF members for the PRF). Refer to 3.15.6 for unauthorized stratifications. Except as
authorized in the following paragraphs, do not consider, refer to, or include comments regarding:
3.16.1. Promotion statements or reference to grades and/or positions higher than the ratee
holds are prohibited.
3.16.1.1. Promotion statements that are pushes to the next higher grade are prohibited.
Exception: Statements of fact (e.g., "filled a Lt Col billet") are authorized if the ratee was
assigned to the UMD position. Additionally, while promotion statements are prohibited,
an evaluator may make recommendations to select officers for a particular assignment,
developmental education, augmentation, continuation, or conditional reserve status.
3.16.1.2. Any reference, direct or indirect, to an officer’s order of merit, line number,
position sequence, etc. on any boarded selection is unauthorized. Exception: Statements
acknowledging an officer’s selection for promotion during the reporting period are
acceptable.
3.16.1.3. The term “Senior” on officer evaluations is prohibited. This term is commonly
understood as a euphemism for colonels and above, or to refer to members holding a higher
grade than the ratee, and therefore constitutes an implied promotions statement and is
prohibited in officer evaluations. Exception: (RegAF and ARC only) On PRFs for
lieutenant colonels being promoted to colonel, the term “Senior” may be used.
3.16.1.4. Referring to a major as the “Senior Chaplain” is authorized; however, referring
to a major as “Performing senior leadership duties” is prohibited.
3.16.2. Comments on officer evaluations regarding completion of, or enrollment in,
Developmental Education (DE)/OPME (in residence or non-residence) and Advanced
Academic Degree (AAD) education are prohibited.
3.16.2.1. Performance and special recognition comments on officers attending in-
residence education and/or training will be documented appropriately on the AF Form 475
(see Chapter 6). Exception: When preparing officer evaluations and PRFs (RegAF and
ARC only), evaluators may comment on Air War College non-residential program
Outstanding Graduates; unlike resident students, non-resident students do not receive a
training report to document this achievement.
3.16.2.2. For officer evaluations only: Evaluators may comment on an officer’s
competitive assignment selection to programs that fall outside of the Developmental
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 95
Education Designation Board (DEDB) (RegAF and ARC officers) or the USSF ILE & SLE
Board (USSF officers), to include but not limited to Olmstead, Fulbright, Rhodes, School
of Advanced Air and Space Studies, and the School of Advanced Warfighting Studies.
3.16.2.3. Evaluators will not comment on an officer’s status on the school’s list, selection
for DE/OPME, and/or specific schools (e.g., ACSC, AWC, Joint) but will limit their
remarks to “PDE”, “IDE”, or “SDE” only (RegAF and ARC officers) and “PLE,” “ILE,”
or “SLE” (for USSF officers). Note: An assignment recommendation for Air Force
Institute of Technology Master’s or Doctoral degree program is authorized.
3.16.3. Assignment and DE/OPME Recommendations. Assignment and developmental
DE/OPME recommendations on officer evaluations that are inconsistent with an officer’s
current grade are prohibited. The intent and philosophy of the Officer Evaluation System is to
recommend an officer for assignments or positions and resident level of developmental
education/OPME that reflect the ratee’s potential.
3.16.3.1. There is a fine line between an assignment recommendation and an overt,
implied, or veiled promotion statement. When making an assignment recommendation on
an officer evaluation, there will be no reference to a higher grade, and it must be consistent
with the officer’s appropriate progression of their professional development.
3.16.3.2. Evaluators may make one or more assignment recommendations in an officer’s
evaluation provided the recommendations are both appropriate and realistically achievable
for the officer’s current grade or current grade plus one. The assignment recommendation
may involve the current grade plus one if the officer has completed or is currently
completing the last reasonable career development for the current grade. Example:
“Highly recommend for Air Force Institute of Technology—then Joint Duty.” Note: Air
Force Institute of Technology can be used for an assignment push, however, it cannot be
used as a developmental education/OPME push.
3.16.3.3. The intent is to focus on what job or DE/OPME assignment the officer should be
doing immediately after their current assignment. Anything beyond the next assignment
would be mapping out a career or making an implied promotion statement. Both instances
are contrary to the spirit and intent of the Officer Evaluation System.
3.16.3.4. In addition to assignment recommendations, evaluators may also make
recommendations for the appropriate level of in-residence developmental
education/OPME on officer evaluations and LOEs. DE/OPME pushes are not authorized
on training reports.
3.16.3.4.1. Evaluators determine the appropriate level recommendation by considering
the highest level of in-residence DE/OPME the officer has already completed along
with the eligibility criteria for each level of in-residence DE/OPME. (Squadron Officer
School is the appropriate level of primary developmental education (PDE) for Air
Force officers and primary level education (PLE) for Space Force officers).
3.16.3.4.2. For Air Force lieutenant through captain, a PDE recommendation is
appropriate until the officer has completed PDE in-residence. For Space Force
lieutenants through captain, a PLE recommendation is appropriate until the officer has
completed PLE in-residence.
96 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
3.16.3.4.3. For an Air Force captain, once the officer completes PDE, an intermediate
developmental education (IDE) recommendation is appropriate. For a Space Force
captain, once the officer completes PLE, an Intermediate Level Education (ILE)
recommendation is appropriate.
3.16.3.4.4. For an Air Force major, if as of the close-out date of the evaluation, the
officer has not already completed IDE in-residence and is still eligible for
consideration, an IDE recommendation is appropriate. However, once the major
completes IDE in-residence or when the officer is no longer eligible for consideration,
then a senior developmental education (SDE) recommendation is appropriate. For a
Space Force major, if as of the close-out date of the evaluation, the officer has not
already completed ILE in-residence and is still eligible for consideration, an ILE
recommendation is appropriate. However, once the major completes ILE in-residence
or when the officer is no longer eligible for consideration, then a senior level education
(SLE) recommendation is appropriate.
3.16.3.4.5. Raters cannot recommend officers for specific schools, including “Joint
DE.” Only the terms “PDE,” “IDE,” and “SDE” for Air Force officers or “PLE,”
“ILE,” and “SLE” for Space Force officers are authorized. The appropriate venue for
a specific school recommendation is through the annual DE/OPME process.
3.16.3.5. Examples of Acceptable Assignment DE/OPME Recommendations.
3.16.3.5.1. “Make Capt Cousins an MPF Chief.” (Appropriate next level of
progression).
3.16.3.5.2. On a Lt Col OPR, “Make him an Ops Group Commander.” (Appropriate
next level of progression).
3.16.3.5.3. For Air Force officers: “Send Major Smith to Intermediate Developmental
Education.” For Space Force officers: “Send Major Smith to Intermediate Level
Education.” (Appropriate DE/OPME progression).
3.16.3.5.4. For Air Force Officers: “After Intermediate Developmental Education,
assign to Air Staff.” For Space Force Officers: “After Intermediate Level Education,
assign to Space Staff.” (Appropriate DE/OPME with follow-on assignment).
3.16.3.5.5. For a major who has completed Air Command & Staff College in-
residence, or who is out of the eligibility window, recommendations for SDE (Air
Force) or SLE (Space Force) would be appropriate, “Send to Senior Developmental
Education,” (Air Force) or “Send to Senior Level Education,” (Space Force).
3.16.3.5.6. For a captain who has completed PDE (Air Force) or PLE (Space Force)
in-residence, or who is beyond the window of eligibility, an appropriate
recommendation would be “In-resident Intermediate Developmental Education a
Must” (Air Force) or “Intermediate Level Education a Must,” (Space Force).
3.16.3.6. Examples of Prohibited Assignment and DE/OPME Recommendations.
3.16.3.6.1. “Make Lt Triska an FSS Commander”. Inappropriate next level of
progression.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 97
3.16.3.6.2. “Send Capt Brown to Intermediate Developmental Education after
selection to major.” (Reference to Intermediate Developmental Education is
appropriate, but the comment “after selection to major” is an implied promotion
statement).
3.16.3.6.3. “Intermediate Developmental Education in 2023, Group Commander in
2028, and Wing Commander in 2031.” (Goes beyond the scope of the next
assignment).
3.16.3.6.4. “Capt Phelps is ready to be a flying Sq/CC” and “Make Maj Knisley a
group commander.” (In both cases, the recommendations are clearly beyond the
officer’s next assignment and are viewed as veiled promotion statements).
3.16.4. Officer Bonuses. Comments on an officer's decision to accept or decline retention
bonus pay (e.g., aviation bonus, officer retention bonus) is prohibited.
3.16.5. Separation or Retirement Status. Comments referring to separation, retirement, or
transfer to reserve status are prohibited. However, comments may be warranted when an
officer displays a reluctance to accept responsibility, a negative attitude toward the job, and/or
exhibits a decrease in performance that can be reasonably attributed to a pending separation or
retirement. Comments are limited to the behavior and not the fact the member is separating,
retiring, or transferring to a reserve status. Note: Although comments are mandatory, an
evaluator may use the minimum bullets (AF Form 707) or performance statements (ALQ
Evaluation) required in accordance with Table 3.1 (USSF officers) or Table 3.6 (RegAF and
ARC officers) as applicable.
3.16.6. Civilian Employment. Comments about civil service jobs or other civilian occupations
are prohibited unless it directly relates to the military position and their military performance.
Recommendations for civilian employment are prohibited.
3.17. Extensions of Close-out Dates. Extensions of close-out dates are only authorized for
general officer and USSF lieutenant through colonel evaluations.
3.17.1. The authority to extend the close-out date for general officer evaluations are AF/A1LG
(for RegAF and AFR extended active duty general officers), NGB-GO (for non-extended
active duty ANG general officers), and SF/S1L (for USSF general officers). For USSF
lieutenant through colonel evaluations, the authority to extend the close-out date is retained by
HQ AFPC/DPMSPE. Exception: In the event a CRO occurs prior to the annual close-out
date of an evaluation, and 60 calendar days of supervision has not been obtained as of the
annual close-out date, MPF/CSS personnel will adjust the close-out to the date on which the
rater achieves 60 days of supervision. See Table 3.3., Note 4.
3.17.2. Events that occur after the close-out date. Extensions are only granted to allow
evaluators to document negative behavior (e.g., court-martial actions, investigations, etc.).
Extensions are not granted to document awards, achievements or completion/non-completion
of any training. Extensions on DBH evaluations are not authorized. Extensions must be
requested prior to but no later than 30 calendar days after the close-out date of the evaluation.
3.17.2.1. Pending Administrative Actions. If an incident or event occurs that reflects a
departure from standards or derogatory in nature between the time an annual or initial
evaluation closes out and the time it becomes a matter of record that is of such serious
98 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
significance that inclusion in that evaluation is warranted, an extension of the close-out
date may be requested by the unit commander. This includes completion of an
investigation begun prior to the close-out date or confirmation of behavior that was only
alleged as of the close-out date. Commanders may request officer evaluation close-out
date extensions to ensure resolution of any pending administrative actions or other
significant issues. Extensions will be granted to cover only the time necessary to complete
actions, not to exceed 59 days.
3.17.3. (USSF only) Send request for extensions to HQ AFPC/DPMSPE via the servicing
personnel office, who in turn will forward the request to the appropriate office of primary
responsibility listed in Table 1.1. (T-3) This must be done in a timely manner, and a
commander-initiated email is acceptable. (T-3) The request must include the following
information: Name, Grade, and social security number of ratee, evaluation “FROM” and
“THRU” dates, desired close-out date (not to exceed 59 days), and a complete rationale as to
why the extension is needed. (T-1) Include all applicable pertinent information including dates
of investigations during the reporting period and/or deployment dates (if applicable).
Incomplete requests will be returned without action. (T-3)
3.17.4. (USSF only) Approved extensions must be documented by placing the following
statement in the feedback section of the AF Form 707: “Close-out date was extended in
accordance with DAFI 36-2406, paragraph 3.18.” (T-1)
3.17.5. When the approving authority grants an extension, only one extension, not to exceed
59 days will be granted. (T-1) If the action cannot be finalized by, or event occurs after, the
extended close-out date, the evaluation will be completed using the original close-out date.
(T-1) If desired, the commander can then direct another evaluation be rendered at the 120-day
point (60-day point for referral evaluations) to capture the incident.
Table 3.1. Instructions for Preparing AF Form 707, Officer Performance Report.
Note: Air Force terminology on the AF Form 707 applies to the equivalent Space Force
terminology (e.g., Airman applies to Guardian, Duty Air Force Specialty Code applies to
Duty Space Force Specialty Code).
SECTION I. RATEE IDENTIFICATION DATA
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
1
Name
Enter Last Name, First Name, Middle
Initial and any suffix (e.g., JR., SR., III).
If there is no middle initial, the use of
“NMI” is optional. Name will be in all
upper case.
DOE, JOHN E. JR.
2
SSN
Enter full social security number.
123-45-6789
3
Grade (Rank)
Enter appropriate grade. See paragraph
1.4.9.
2LT, 1LT, CAPT,
MAJ, LT COL, COL
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 99
4
DAFSC/DSFSC
Enter the DAFSC/DSFSC held as of the
“THRU” date of the evaluation,
including prefix and suffix, if applicable.
365-day extended deployments will use
the TDY DAFSC/DSFSC. See
paragraph 1.4.8.
38F4
5
Reason for Report
Enter reason for report from officer
evaluation notice and as determined by
Tables 3.2 or 3.3.
Annual, CRO,
Directed by HQ
USAF/USSF, Directed
by CC
6
PAS Code
Enter PAS code of ratee’s unit of
assignment as of the close-out date.
Those assigned to a 365-day extended
deployment billet, use the home station
PAS code.
AFR only: For IMAs, PIRR and PIRR
Category E, use unit of attachment’s
PAS code.
TE1CFYRZ
7
Organization,
Command, Location
Enter information as of close-out date.
Nomenclature does not necessarily
duplicate what is on the officer
evaluation notice. The goal is an
accurate description of where and to
whom the ratee belongs. Command will
be listed inside parentheses. 365-day
extended deployments will use the home
station unit, “with duty at . . .”
AFR only: For IMAs, PIRR and PIRR
Category E, information will be that of
unit of attachment. See paragraph
1.4.7.
964th Airborne Air
Control Squadron
(ACC), Tinker AFB
OK
124th Airborne Air
Control Squadron
(ACC), Tinker AFB
OK
341st Security Forces
Group (AFSPC),
Malmstrom AFB MT,
with duty at 447 ESFS
(USAFCENT),
Baghdad International
Airport, Baghdad, Iraq
8
Period of Report
FROM Date: Enter the day following
the last evaluation’s close-out date. See
paragraph 3.10.
THRU Date: Use the date on the OPR
notice or see paragraph 3.11 to
determine the close-out date.
12 Jan 2015 thru 11
Jan 2016
9
Number Days
Supervision and
Number of Days Non-
Enter number of days ratee was
supervised by rater during the reporting
period. See paragraph 3.12.
365
120
100 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Rated
Enter number of days non-rated (if
applicable) in accordance with
paragraph 1.4.11
10
SRID
Enter the SRID for the ratee’s unit of
assignment as of the close-out date.
AFR only: For IMAs and PIRR
Category E, SRID is that of unit of
attachment.
365-day extended deployments will use
the home station SRID.
1S341
See paragraph
1.3.2 for classified
locations
SECTION II. JOB DESCRIPTION
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
11
Duty Title
Enter the approved duty title as of the
close-out date in upper/lower case. If the
duty title on the notice is abbreviated and
entries are not clear, spell them out. If
wrong, enter the correct duty title and
take appropriate actions to update the
personnel data system.
Corrective actions should be initiated
upon receipt of the officer evaluation
notice. Ensure the duty title is
commensurate with the ratee’s grade,
AFSC/SFSC, and responsibility.
365-day extended deployments will use
the deployed duty title.
Flight Commander
12
Job Description
Comments in bullet format are
mandatory. Limit text to four lines.
Enter information about the position the
ratee held in the unit and the nature or
level of job responsibilities. The rater
develops the information for this section.
This description must reflect the
uniqueness of each ratee's job. Be
specific--include level of responsibility,
number of people supervised, dollar
value of resources accountable
- Commands, directs
and leads 50 AWACS
aircrew members…
- Responsible for…
- Supervises 9
NCOs…
- 89 RegAF, 65 Air
National Guard and 55
AFR…
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 101
for/projects managed, etc. Make it clear;
use plain English. Avoid jargon,
acronyms, and topical references—they
obscure rather than clarify meaning.
Previous jobs held during the reporting
period may be mentioned only if it
impacts the evaluation.
365-day extended deployments will use
the TDY job description. For
deployments that do not warrant an
evaluation, reserve the final bullet for
significant additional duties.
Commander’s job description will
include the total force (RegAF, ANG,
and AFR) assigned. A short one-line
description of the unit’s mission may be
included in the job description if it is
necessary to better explain the ratee’s
duties.
SECTION III. PERFORMANCE FACTORS
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
13
Job Knowledge,
Leadership Skills,
Professional Qualities
(includes adherence to
standards),
Organizational Skills,
Judgment &
Decisions, and
Communication Skills
Enter an “X” in the appropriate box.
All six performance factors are
consolidated in this block. Specific
performance factors are listed on the
reverse side of the form.
Organizational Climate: See
paragraph 1.8.9
X
14
Does Not Meet/Meets
Standards
Enter an “X in the appropriate box.
One of the two blocks must be marked.
X
SECTION IV. RATER OVERALL ASSESSMENT
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
15
Rater Overall
Comments are mandatory; must use
- Executed…
102 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Assessment
bullet format and include at least one
bullet. This section allows evaluators to
comment on the ratee’s overall
performance and performance-based
potential as compared to others in the
same grade known by the evaluators. If
the “THE RATER IS ALSO THE
REVIEWER” comment is required in
Section VI, the rater will digitally sign
the rater, additional rater, and reviewer
signature blocks; leave Section V
comments area blank.
Organizational Climate: See
paragraph 1.8.9
Oversight of Housing: See paragraph
1.8.10.
For AFR colonels in GO billets, include
a mandatory statement that the officer
“continues in” or “leave” the general
officer position. See paragraph 1.9 for
disagreements. See paragraph 1.10 for
referrals.
- Performed...
- Led…
16
Last Performance
Feedback Date
Raters certify performance feedback in
this area by entering the date the most
recent feedback was provided. Enter
date as DD MMM YYYY. If feedback
was not accomplished, state reason why.
There is no excuse for not completing
this requirement. If feedback was not
required, enter “N/A.” Do not use the
date feedback was provided in
conjunction with completion of the
evaluation. See Chapter 2.
15 Jan 2015
Or
Feedback was not
accomplished due
to…
17
Rater’s Name, Grade,
Branch of Service,
Organization,
Command & Location
Enter Rater’s signature block as of the
close-out date. See paragraph 1.4.12.
For ANG, the use of component ID (e.g.,
XXANG) may be used in the signature
block.
SUE J. DOE, Col,
USAF
20th Dental Squadron
(ACC) Shaw AFB SC
JOE C. BUSCH, GS-
09, DAF
27th Special
Operations Wing
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 103
(AFSOC)
Cannon AFB NM
JACOB M. FREER,
Col, KSANG
184th Force Support
Squadron (ACC)
McConnell AFB KS
18
Duty Title
Enter duty title in upper/lower case
letters as of the close-out date of the
officer evaluation.
Commander
19
SSN
Enter the last four digits of the social
security number.
1234
20
Date & Signature
The forms have digital signature and
auto-date capability. In the rare instance
where digital signatures cannot be used,
sign in reproducible blue or black ink
and handwrite, stamp or type the date.
Do not sign blank forms that do not
contain ratings, sign before the close-out
date (only on or after), or date before the
date the rater signed it or earlier than the
date of the ratee’s endorsement to a
referral letter. Additional rater
assessment block will be locked, and
reviewer signature capability unlocked
with the additional rater’s digital
signature. See paragraph 1.4.12.
Digital or wet
signatures. A
combination of both is
authorized.
SECTION V. ADDITIONAL RATER OVERALL ASSESSMENT
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
21
Concur/Non- Concur
Place an “X” in the appropriate box
indicating concurrence/non-concurrence
of the rater’s assessment. If non-
concurring, comments are required. See
paragraph 1.9 for disagreements.
X
22
Additional Rater
Overall Assessment
Comments are mandatory. Must contain
at least 1 bullet, a maximum of 4 lines.
Must be in bullet format.
Use this section to support rating
decision and allow evaluators to
comment on the ratee’s overall
- Spearheaded…
- Integrated...
- Enabled…
104 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
performance and performance-based
potential as compared to others in the
same grade known by the evaluators. See
paragraph 1.12 for inappropriate
comments. See paragraph 1.9 for
disagreements. See paragraph 1.10 for
referrals.
Organizational Climate: See
paragraph 1.8.9.
Oversight of Housing: See paragraph
1.8.10.
23
Additional Rater
Name, Grade, Branch
of Service,
Organization,
Command & Location
Enter the additional rater’s information.
Additional raters assigned on or prior to
close-out date, enter information as of
the close-out date; additional raters
assigned after the close-out date, enter
the information as of the date signed.
Multiple general officers serving as
evaluators are prohibited, see paragraph
1.7.1.7 for exceptions.
For ANG, the use of component ID (e.g.,
XXANG) may be used in the signature
block.
BILL R. REED, JR.,
Col, USAF
20th Operations
Group (ACC) Shaw
AFB SC
JAYMES E. JONES,
GS-12, DAF
35th Fighter Wing
(PACAF)
Misawa AB, Japan
JACOB M. FREER,
Col, KSANG
184th Force Support
Squadron (ACC)
McConnell AFB KS
24
Duty Title
Enter duty title as of the close-out date of
the officer evaluation.
(use format in example)
Commander
25
SSN
Enter the last four digits of the social
security number.
1234
26
Date & Signature
The forms have digital signature and
auto-date capability. In the rare instance
where digital signatures cannot be used,
sign in reproducible blue or black ink
and handwrite, stamp or type the date.
Do not sign blank forms that do not
contain ratings, sign before the close-out
date (only on or after), or date before the
Digital or wet
signatures. A
combination of both is
authorized.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 105
date the rater signed it or earlier than the
date of the ratee’s endorsement to a
referral letter. Additional rater
assessment block will be locked, and
reviewer signature capability unlocked
with the additional rater’s digital
signature.
See paragraph 1.4.12.
SECTION VI. REVIEWER
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
27
Concur/Non- Concur
The reviewer will place an “X” in the
appropriate box indicating concurrence
or non-concurrence of the additional
rater’s assessment. See paragraph 1.9
for disagreements.
X
28
Reviewer Comments
The reviewer is the primary quality
control level and guards against
inaccuracy and exaggeration.
“THE ADDITIONAL
RATER IS ALSO
THE REVIEWER”
29
Reviewer’s Name,
Grade, Branch of
Service, Organization,
Command & Location
Enter reviewer’s signature block.
Reviewers assigned on or prior to close-
out date, enter information as of the
close- out date; if assigned after the
close-out date, enter the information as
of the date signed.
Multiple GOs as evaluators are
prohibited see paragraph
1.7.1.7 for exceptions.
For ANG, the use of component ID (e.g.,
XXANG) may be used in the signature
block.
JOHN H. DOE, Col,
USAF
20th Fighter Wing
(ACC) Shaw AFB SC
JACOB M. FREER,
Col, KSANG
184th Force Support
Squadron (ACC)
McConnell AFB KS
30
Duty Title
Enter the duty title as of the close-out
date of the OPR.
(use format in example)
Commander
31
SSN
Enter the last four digits of the social
security number.
2345
32
Date & Signature
The forms have digital signature and
auto-date capability. In the rare instance
where digital signatures cannot be used,
Digital or wet
signatures. A
combination of both is
106 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
sign in reproducible blue or black ink
and handwrite, stamp or type the date.
Do not sign blank forms that do not
contain ratings, sign before the close-out
date (only on or after), or date before the
date the rater signed it or earlier than the
date of the ratee’s endorsement to a
referral letter. Additional rater
assessment block will be locked, and
reviewer signature capability unlocked
with the additional rater’s digital
signature.
See paragraph 1.4.12.
authorized.
SECTION VII. FUNCTIONAL EXAMINER/AIR FORCE ADVISOR
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
33
Functional Examiner
or AF/SF Advisor
When applicable, place an “X” in the
appropriate box. See paragraph 1.6.8.
X
34
Name, Grade, Branch
of Service,
Organization &
Location
Enter advisor/functional examiner’s
information as of the close-out date.
See paragraph 1.4.12.
JACK C. DOE, Col,
USAF
20th Fighter Wing
(ACC)
Shaw AFB SC
JACOB M. FREER,
Col, KSANG
184th Force Support
Squadron (ACC)
McConnell AFB KS
35
Duty Title
Enter advisor/examiner’s duty title.
(use format in example)
Command Financial
Manager
36
SSN
Enter the last four digits of the social
security number.
1122
37
Date & Signature
The forms have digital signature and
auto-date capability. In the rare instance
where digital signatures cannot be used,
sign in reproducible blue or black ink
and handwrite, stamp or type the date.
Do not sign blank forms that do not
Digital or wet
signatures. A
combination of both is
authorized.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 107
contain ratings, sign before the close-out
date (only on or after), or date before the
date the rater signed it or earlier than the
date of the ratee’s endorsement to a
referral letter. Additional rater
assessment block will be locked, and
reviewer signature capability unlocked
with the additional rater’s digital
signature.
See paragraph 1.4.12.
SECTION VIII. RATEE’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
38
Ratee
Acknowledgement.
I understand my
signature does not
constitute agreement
or disagreement. I
acknowledge all
required feedback was
accomplished during
the reporting period
and upon receipt of
this report.
After reviewing evaluation, the ratee will
read the acknowledgement statement and
place an “X” in the appropriate box
indicating Yes or No.
X
39
Date & Signature
The ratee must acknowledge receipt
prior to the evaluation becoming a matter
of record by signing in this block.
Signing the evaluation does not imply
concurrence, but acknowledgement and
review of personal information on the
form. If ratee non-concurs with the
evaluation, they may submit an appeal in
accordance with Chapter 10.
The rater will suspense the ratee three
duty days (30 calendar days for ARC) to
sign the evaluation.
Non-digital: Handwrite, date stamp or
type the date. Sign on or after the close-
out date. Select the appropriate choice
Digital or wet
signatures. A
combination of both is
authorized.
108 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
from drop down menu:
Blank – member concurs and digitally
signs evaluation.
“Member unable to sign” – use when
member is incapacitated or unavailable
to sign; rater or any higher evaluator on
the form in the chain (digitally) signs.
“Member declined to sign” – use when
member refuses to sign the form; rater or
any higher evaluator on the form in the
chain (digitally) signs.
See paragraph 3.19
SECTION IX. PERFORMANCE FACTORS
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
40
Job Knowledge
If ratee meets standards, leave blank. If
ratee does not meet standards in any of
the listed areas, place an “X” in the
“Does Not Meet Standards” block for
Job Knowledge.
See paragraph 1.10 for referrals.
X or leave blank
41
Leadership Skills
If ratee meets standards, leave blank. If
ratee does not meet standards in any of
the listed areas, place an “X” in the
“Does Not Meet Standards” block for
Leadership Skills.
See paragraph 1.10 for referrals.
X or leave blank
42
Professional Qualities
If ratee meets standards (including
fitness), leave blank. If ratee does not
meet standards in any of the listed areas,
place an “X” in the “Does Not Meet
Standards” block for Professional
Qualities.
See paragraph 1.10 for referrals.
X or leave blank
43
Organizational Skills
If ratee meets standards, leave blank. If
ratee does not meet standards in any of
the listed areas, place an “X” in the
“Does Not Meet Standards” block for
Organizational Skills.
See paragraph 1.10 for referrals.
Organizational Climate: See
paragraph 1.8.9
X or leave blank
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 109
44
Judgment And
Decisions
If ratee meets standards, leave blank. If
ratee does not meet standards in any of
the listed areas, place an “X” in the
“Does Not Meet Standards” block for
Judgment and Decisions.
See paragraph 1.10 for referrals.
X or leave blank
45
Communication Skills
If ratee meets standards, leave blank. If
ratee does not meet standards in any of
the listed areas, place an “X” in the
“Does Not Meet Standards” block for
Communication Skills.
See paragraph 1.10 for referrals.
X or leave blank
SECTION X. REMARKS
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
46
Acronyms
Due to limited space on the front of the
form, evaluators may spell out acronyms
in this block. They will be listed
alphabetically and separated by a
semicolon (;).
Personnel Support for
Contingency
Operations
(PERSCO);
HAF
47
Approved Close-Out
Extensions
(USSF only)
If the commander has obtained an
approved extension of the close-out date
in accordance with paragraph 3.18,
enter the statement from column C.
“Close-out date was
extended in
accordance with
paragraph
3.18.”
48
DG or TG Award
If ratee was awarded a DG or TG from a
training course for which no TR was
required, the rater may enter the criteria
for the award in Section X, Remarks.
- Top 10%, awarded
DG . . .
49
Other Comments
There will be instances where DAFI 36-
2406 requires additional remarks. The
placement of comments not specified in
this DAFI may be placed here. Contact
AFPC/DPMSPE for clarification.
e.g., paragraph 1.7,
when rater died, MIA,
POW, incapacitated,
formally relieved from
duty, the additional
rater becomes the
rater.
50
Mandatory
Statements
Enter mandatory statement(s) prior to
listing the acronyms.
e.g., “Reviewer’s
grade is lower than the
Previous Rater”, “Two
GOs authorized in
accordance with
paragraph 1.7”
110 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
SECTION XI. REFERRAL EVALUATIONS
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
51
Referral Report
Complete this section for referral
evaluations only.
See paragraph 1.10
Table 3.2. When to Prepare Officer Evaluations for RegAF and ARC Officers (Lieutenant
thru Colonel).
R
U
L
E
A
B
If
(See Notes 1 and 2)
Then write evaluation and
enter reason as
(See Note 10)
1
subsequent evaluations will close out on the SCOD
(based on grade). (T-1). See Note 3 and Note 4.
Annual
2
the ratee’s performance or conduct is unsatisfactory or
marginal and a special evaluation is appropriate, and
the supervision period was 60 calendar days. See Note
5.
DBC
3
the ratee has been declared missing-in-action, captured,
or detained in captive status. See Note 6.
DBH
4
a special evaluation is directed by HAF (See Note 7
and Note 8), or NGB for ANG officers.
DBH
5
the ratee is placed into record status 6, deserter. See
Note 9.
DBC
6
any sentence of confinement as the result of a court-
martial.
DBC
Notes:
1. Colonels selected for promotion to brigadier general receive evaluations IAW Chapter 7.
2. (For RegAF and ANG only) If the officer evaluation is already a matter of record, and the
event or circumstances that brought about the evaluation changes or no longer exists, take no
action. The officer evaluation is a valid evaluation and remains in the ratee’s records.
3. See Table 3.4 for appropriate SCODs. (RegAF only) Evaluations for officers selected for
promotion will have a close-out date on the SCOD of the projected grade. (T-1) (AFR only)
An officer must have at least 16 points and 120 calendar days of duty performance outside of
a training report to receive an ALQ evaluation; if the officer does not meet this requirement
by the SCOD, submit an administrative LOE for a gap report.
4. For an officer who enters active duty, the first evaluation will be required at the next
SCOD for their respective grade, given there is at least 180 days between the EAD and the
SCOD. (T-1) For AFR officers, the first evaluation will be required at the next SCOD for the
ratee’s respective grade, given there is at least 180 days between the EAD and the SCOD and
a minimum of 16 points (do not include Extension Course Institute or membership points); if
the ratee had not earned the required number of points, the officer will receive a gap report
utilizing an administrative LOE. (T-1)
5. This includes placement on or removal from the control roster (Director, NGB; Office of
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 111
Adjutant General; MAJCOM; wing, group, squadron).
6. Do not prepare evaluations for periods of missing-in-action, captured, or detained in
captive status of less than 15 calendar days. If the ratee remains in one of these categories for
15 calendar days or more, prepare an evaluation under this rule without regard to the number
of days of supervision. Close the evaluation on the day the ratee was placed in missing-in-
action, captured, or detained in captive status. These evaluations are as directed by HQ
AFPC/DP3SP or HQ ARPC/DPTSE.
7. (RegAF and ANG only) HQ AFPC/DP3SP, HQ AFPC/DPMSPE, and USAF/A1LO retain
the authority to direct evaluations under this rule. Special evaluations covering outstanding
duty performance are not permitted under this rule.
8. (AFR only) HAF/REP retains the authority to direct evaluations under this rule. If
HAF/RE requires special evaluations on certain officers for selection board use, HQ
ARPC/DPTSE furnishes ratee names to the MAJCOM along with appropriate suspense dates
and directs submission of evaluations under this rule. Special evaluations covering
outstanding duty performance are not permitted under this rule.
9. The close-out date of the evaluation is the effective date the ratee is placed in record status
6, deserter, and may only comment on the negative behavior.
10. (AFR only) For Individual Mobilization Augmentees (IMAs), Participating Individual
Ready Reserve (PIRR) and Participating Individual Ready Reserve Category E (PIRR
Category E), the unit of assignment is responsible for completing the officer evaluation.
Table 3.3. When to Prepare Officer Evaluations for USSF Officers (Lieutenant thru
Colonel).
R
U
L
E
A
B
C
If
(See Notes 1, 2, and 3)
and
supervision
period covers
at least
then write evaluation and
enter reason as
1
the ratee has not had an evaluation, or
one year has passed since the close-
out date of last performance OPR or
training from school of 20 weeks or
more.
120 calendar
days
Annual
See Note 4.
2
the rater changes, officer departs
PCS/PCA to school, or officer is
separating. See Note 5 and Note 6.
120 calendar
days
Change of Reporting
Official (CRO)
See Note 7.
3
the ratee or rater departs TDY for
more than 120 calendar days for
other than formal training or normal
contingency (deployed) operations.
See Note 5 and Note 6.
120 calendar
days
CRO
4
ratee’s performance or conduct is
unsatisfactory or marginal and a
special evaluation is appropriate.
60 calendar
days
See Note 8.
Directed by Commander
5
the ratee has been declared missing in
action, captured, or detained in
See Note 9.
Directed by Headquarters
Space Force (HSF)
112 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
captive status.
6
a special evaluation is directed by
HSF. See Note 10.
As directed
Directed by HSF
7
a referral LOE has been written or
would contain referral comments, if
written. See Note 11.
60 calendar
days
8
the ratee is placed into Record Status
6, Deserter.
60 calendar
days
See Note 12.
Directed by Commander
9
an evaluation is prepared to
document significant improvement in
duty performance.
120 calendar
days
See Note 13.
10
any sentence of confinement as the
result of a court-martial.
No minimum
days required
Notes:
1. If the ratee is attending training or education. See Chapter 6.
2. Colonels selected for promotion to brigadier general receive evaluations IAW Chapter
7.
3. If the OPR is already a matter of record and the event or circumstances that brought
about the evaluation changes or no longer exists, take no action. The OPR is a valid
evaluation and remains in the ratee’s records. Exception: The CSS/MPF/HR Specialist
updates referral OPRs that are prepared as a result of a PCS and files them in the ratee’s
records regardless of whether or not the evaluation was a matter of record at the time
authorities canceled or delayed an assignment.
4. If a CRO occurs:
a. prior to the annual close-out date, and 120-days of supervision is not able to be obtained
on the annual close-out date, the evaluation is closed out on the annual close-out date
provided at least 60 calendar days of supervision have been obtained. If 60 calendar days
of supervision has not been obtained as of the annual close-out date adjust the close-out
date to the date on which the rater achieves 60 days of supervision.
b. after the original annual date has passed but before the 120-day supervision period
ends, the evaluation is closed out the day prior to the rater change, provided at least 60
calendar days of supervision have been obtained. The reason for the evaluation remains
“Annual.”
5. Do not confuse CRO with change of supervisor. The home station commander may
authorize a change of reporting official to the TDY location if ALL the following
conditions are met:
Notes: The senior rater matched to the ratee’s home station PAS code must perform
senior rater duties. (T-1)
a. Someone at the TDY location can perform normal rater duties.
b. The rater’s rater meets the requirements of paragraph 1.5.
c. The home station and TDY unit commanders have approved the change (the
Management Level must approve inter-command changes). (T-1)
d. The home station commander assigns a new rater when the TDY ends.
6. If the ratee is selected to fill a 365-day extended deployment billet, a CRO evaluation
must be accomplished provided there has been at least 120 calendar days of supervision.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 113
(T-1)
7. A CRO includes separation from Extended Active Duty. However, no evaluation is
required when the criterion in paragraph 3.4 applies.
8. This includes placement on or removal from the control roster (FLDCOM; space base
delta, delta).
9. Do not prepare evaluations for periods of Missing in Action, captured, or detained in
captive status of less than 15 calendar days. If the ratee remains in one of these categories
for 15 calendar days or more, prepare an evaluation under this rule without regard to the
number of days of supervision. Close the evaluation on the day the ratee was placed in
Missing in Action, captured, or detained in captive status. These evaluations are as
directed by HQ AFPC/DP3SP.
10. HQ AFPC/DP3SP, HQ AFPC/DPMSPE, and SF/S1L retain the authority to direct
evaluations under this rule. Special evaluations covering outstanding duty performance are
not permitted under this rule.
11. If the current rater does not consider the referral comments in a letter of evaluation to
be serious enough to warrant permanent recording, an OPR will not be prepared. (T-1)
12. The close-out date of the evaluation is the effective date the ratee is placed in record
status 6, Deserter, and may only comment on the negative behavior.
13. The commander may direct an evaluation for significant duty improvement only if the
previous evaluation was referred due to substandard duty performance.
Table 3.4. Static Close-out Date Chart for RegAF, ARC and Statutory Tour Members.
Grade
SCOD
2d Lt and 1st Lt
31 Oct
Capt
31 Aug
Maj and Lt Col
31 May
Col
28 Feb. See Note.
Note: In a leap year, the SCOD will remain 28 Feb, and 29 Feb will be the start of the next
reporting period.
Table 3.5. Accounting Dates for Static Close-out Date Evaluations.
Grade (includes selectees)
Static Close-out Date
Accounting Date
2d Lt and 1st Lt
31 Oct
3 Jul
Capt
31 Aug
3 May
Maj and Lt Col
31 May
3 Feb
Col
28 Feb
3 Nov
Note: Accounting dates are approximately 120 calendar days prior to each SCOD and
are established as the 3rd of the month for consistency.
114 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Table 3.6. Instructions for Preparing an Officer Performance Brief (RegAF and ARC
only).
OFFICER PERFORMANCE BRIEF
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
1
Grade
Enter appropriate grade.
See paragraph 1.4.9.
Use “(S)” when using the
select grade and “(T)”
when using the
temporarily promoted
grade.
2Lt, 1Lt, Capt, Maj, Lt Col,
Col, Lt Col (S), Col (T)
2
Name
Enter Last Name, First
Name, Middle Initial,
and any suffix (e.g., JR.,
SR., III). If there is no
middle initial, the use of
“NMI” is optional. Name
will be in all upper case.
DOE, JOHN E. JR.
3
DoDID
Enter full DoDID
number
1234567890
4
Duty Title
Review and ensure the
approved duty title is
entered as of the SCOD,
unless the member has a
PCS, PCA, or departs
from a 365-day extended
deployment then enter
the duty title as of the
accounting date. If the
duty title is abbreviated
and entries are not clear,
spell them out. If wrong,
enter the correct duty title
and take appropriate
actions to update the
personnel data system.
Corrective actions should
be initiated upon receipt
of the evaluation notice.
Ensure the duty title is
commensurate with the
Assistant Director of
Operations
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 115
ratee’s grade, AFSC, and
responsibility. 365-day
extended deployments
will use the deployed
duty title.
5
DAFSC
Enter the DAFSC
including prefix and
suffix, if applicable as of
the SCOD; however, if
the officer has a PCS,
PCA, or departs from a
365-day extended
deployment on or after
the accounting date, use
the DAFSC as of the
established accounting
date. Officers on a 365-
day extended
deployments will use the
TDY DAFSC. See
paragraph 1.4.8.
12F3F
6
Reason
Enter reason for report
from OPR notice and as
determined by Table 3.2.
Annual, Directed by HQ
USAF, Directed by CC
7
Period
FROM Date: Enter the
day following the last
evaluation’s close-out
date. See paragraph
3.10.
THRU Date: Use the
date on the OPR notice
or see paragraph 3.11 to
determine the close-out
date.
1 June 23 thru 31 May 24
8
Days Supervised
Enter number of days
ratee was supervised by
the rater during the
reporting period. See
paragraph 3.12.
365
9
Days Non-Rated
Enter number of days
Non-Rated (if applicable)
in accordance with
paragraph 1.4.11.
120
10
Ratee Acknowledgement
The ratee must
acknowledge receipt
Digital or wet signatures. A
combination of both is
116 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
prior to the evaluation
becoming a matter of
record by signing in this
block. Signing the
evaluation does not
imply concurrence, but
acknowledgement and
review of personal
information on the
evaluation. If the ratee
non-concurs with the
evaluation, they may
submit an appeal in
accordance with Chapter
10.
The rater will suspense
the ratee three duty days
(30 calendar days for
ARC) to sign the
evaluation.
Non-digital: Handwrite,
date stamp or type the
date. Sign on or after the
close-out date.
authorized.
11
Organization and
Command
Enter information as of
close-out date unless the
member has a PCS, PCA,
or departs from a 365-
day extended deployment
then enter the
information as of the
accounting date.
Nomenclature does not
necessarily duplicate
what is on the evaluation
notice. The goal is an
accurate description of
where and to whom the
ratee belongs. Command
will be listed inside
parentheses. 365-day
extended deployments
will use the home station
123d Fighter Squadron (ACC)
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 117
unit, “with duty at…”
AFR only: For IMAs,
PIRR and PIRR Category
E, information will be
that of unit of
attachment. See
paragraph 1.4.7.
For Non-EAD members,
use this section to
annotate “(Non-EAD)”
or “(ANG).”
123d Fighter Squadron (ACC)
(Non-EAD)
12
Location
Enter information as of
the close-out date unless
the member has a PCS,
PCA, or departs from a
365-day extended
deployment then enter
the information as of the
accounting date.
JB Langley-Eustis, VA
13
Duty Description
Comments in narrative
format are mandatory
and are limited to the
space provided.
Enter information about
the position the ratee
held in the unit and the
nature or level of job
responsibilities. The
rater develops the
information for this
section.
This description must
reflect the uniqueness of
each ratee’s job. Be
specific—include level of
responsibility, number of
people supervised, dollar
value of resources
accountable for/projects
managed, etc. Make it
clear; use plain English.
Avoid jargon and topical
references—they obscure
Combat ready, worldwide
deployable Lead Weapons
System Officer ready to
execute every mission set of
the multi-role F-15E. Leads
commander’s priority
programs, to include
standardization and
evaluation, safety, security,
and unit morale. Assists in
execution of the daily flying
operations for 75 aircrew, 20
support personnel, and 25
aircraft worth $1.4B.
Executes large force
integration of joint and
multinational forces, ensures
24-hr operations.
118 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
rather than clarify
meaning. Only
acronyms on the
approved acronym list
are authorized.
Previous jobs held during
the reporting period may
be mentioned only if it
impacts the evaluation.
365-day extended
deployments will use the
TDY duty description.
Commander’s duty
description will include
the total force (RegAF,
ANG, AFR, and USSF)
assigned. A short
description of the unit’s
missions may be
included in the job
description if it is
necessary to better
explain the ratee’s duties.
Commands an 80-person
combat-coded F-15E
squadron, manages and
executes a $107M flying hour
program with 3.1K sorties &
5.1K hours and responsible
for $98K annual budget.
Implements combatant
command’s operational plans
and requirements; responsible
for readiness and execution of
daily flying operations for 60
aircrew, 20 support personnel,
and 25 aircrafts worth $1.4B.
Combat fighter pilot qualified
to evaluate and lead all F-15E
mission sets.
RATER ASSESSMENT
14
Stratification
If stratifying ratee, enter
stratification here. See
paragraphs 3.15. If no
stratification is used,
enter the statement,
“THIS SECTION NOT
USED”. If rater is also
the HLR, enter the
statement, “THIS
SECTION NOT USED”.
Rater will enter a
stratification in the HLR
stratification block, if
used.
#3/7 Lt Cols, #2/5 Sq/CCs
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 119
15
Executing the Mission –
Job proficiency,
Initiative, Adaptability
Comments are
mandatory and limited to
the space provided; must
include at least one
performance statement.
See paragraph
1.6.3.11.1. May use
“THIS SECTION NOT
USED” as a mandatory
performance statement.
See paragraph 1.3.3.2.
16
Leading People –
Inclusion/Teamwork,
Emotional Intelligence,
Communication
Comments are
mandatory and limited to
the space provided; must
include at least one
performance statement.
See paragraph
1.6.3.11.2. May use
“THIS SECTION NOT
USED” as a mandatory
performance statement.
For AFR colonels in GO
billets, include a
mandatory statement that
the officer “continues in”
or “leave” the general
officer position. (T-1)
See paragraph 1.9 for
Disagreements. See
paragraph 1.10 for
Referrals.
See paragraph 1.3.3.2.
17
Managing Resources –
Stewardship,
Accountability
Comments are
mandatory and limited to
the space provided; must
include at least one
performance statement.
See paragraph
1.6.3.11.3. May use
“THIS SECTION NOT
USED” as a mandatory
performance statement.
See paragraph 1.3.3.2.
18
Improving the Unit –
Decision Making,
Innovation
Comments are
mandatory and limited to
the space provided; must
include at least one
performance statement.
See paragraph 1.3.3.2.
120 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
See paragraph
1.6.3.11.4. May use
“THIS SECTION NOT
USED” as a mandatory
performance statement.
19
Mandatory Comments
If ratee is a commander,
voting assistance officer,
and/or has command
oversight of privatized
military housing, enter
the appropriate
statement(s). Rater must
also include a unique
performance
statement(s). See
paragraphs 1.8.9,
1.8.10, and 1.11.5.
If required, enter the
applicable statement(s)
“Ratee met all command
climate requirements.”
Or “Ratee did not meet
all command climate
requirements.”
If required, enter the
applicable statement(s)
“The Ratee exercised
effective oversight of
military privatized
housing.” Or “The Ratee
was not effective in
oversight of military
privatized housing.”
If required, enter a
unique performance
statement on the ratee’s
performance as the
voting assistance officer.
See paragraph 1.3.3.2.
20
Rater Name, Grade, and
Branch of Service
Enter rater’s information
as of the close-out date.
However, if the officer
has a PCS, PCA, or
departs from a 365-day
SUE J. DOE, Col, USAF
SALLY S. MESAROS, SES,
DAF
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 121
extended deployment on
or after the accountability
date, use the rater as of
the established
accounting date. See
paragraph 1.4.12.
For ANG, the use of
component ID (e.g.,
XXANG may be used.
JEREMEY R. DICE, GS-15,
DAF
JACOB M. FREER, Col,
KSANG
21
Rater Duty Title
Enter rater’s information
as of the close-out date.
However, if the officer
has a PCS, PCA, or
departs from a 365-day
extended deployment on
or after the accountability
date, use the rater as of
the established
accounting date. See
paragraph 1.4.12.
Deputy Commander
22
Rater Organization and
Command
Enter rater’s information
as of the close-out date.
However, if the officer
has a PCS, PCA, or
departs from a 365-day
extended deployment on
or after the accountability
date, use the rater as of
the established
accounting date. See
paragraph 1.4.12.
366th Fighter Squadron
(ACC)
23
Rater Signature
The evaluations have
digital signature
capability which includes
a date stamp. In the rare
instance where digital
signatures cannot be
used, sign in
reproducible blue or
black ink and handwrite,
stamp, or type the date
next to the signature (DD
MMM YY).
122 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Do not sign blank forms
that do not contain
comments and/or ratings,
sign before the close-out
date (only on or after), or
date before the date the
rater signed it or earlier
than the date of the
ratee’s endorsement to a
referral letter.
HIGHER LEVEL REVIEWER ASSESSMENT
24
Stratification
If stratifying ratee, enter
stratification here. See
paragraphs 3.15. If no
stratification is used,
enter the statement,
“THIS SECTION NOT
USED”
#5/36 Lt Cols, #4/21 Sq/CCs
25
Rater Assessment
The reviewer will select
the appropriate box
indicating concurrence or
non-concurrence of the
additional rater’s
assessment. See
paragraph 1.9 for
disagreements.
X
26
Performance
Statement(s)
Comments are
mandatory and limited to
the space provided; must
contain at least one
performance statement.
See paragraph 1.12 for
inappropriate comments.
See paragraph 1.10 for
referrals. May use
“THIS SECTION NOT
USED” as a mandatory
performance statement.
See paragraph 1.3.3.2.
27
Higher Level Reviewer
Name, Grade and Branch
of Service (For ANG, the
use of component ID
[e.g., XXANG] may be
used.)
Enter the HLR’s
information. HLRs
assigned on or prior to
the close-out date, enter
information as of the
close-out date; HLRs
assigned after the close-
out date, enter the
SUE J. DOE, Col, USAF
SALLY S. MESAROS, SES,
DAF
JEREMEY R. DICE, GS-15,
DAF
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 123
information as of the date
signed.
Multiple general officers
serving as evaluators are
prohibited; see
paragraph 1.7.1.7 for
exceptions. (T-1)
JACOB M. FREER, Col,
KSANG
28
Higher Level Reviewer
Duty Title
Commander
29
Higher Level Reviewer
Organization and
Command
123d Operations Group
(ACC)
30
Higher Level Reviewer
Signature
The evaluations have
digital signature
capability which includes
a date stamp. In the rare
instance where digital
signatures cannot be
used, sign in
reproducible blue or
black ink and handwrite,
stamp, or type the date
next to the signature (DD
MMM YY).
Do not sign blank forms
that do not contain
comments and/or ratings,
sign before the close-out
date (only on or after), or
date before the date the
rater signed it or earlier
than the date of the
ratee’s endorsement to a
referral letter.
Functional Examiner/Air Force Advisor
30
Functional Examiner
and/or Air Force Advisor
When applicable, place
an “X” in the appropriate
box(es) See paragraph
1.6.8.
Select “No comments” or
“Comments” as
applicable.
X
124 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
31
Functional Examiner
and/or Air Force Advisor
Comments
The comments block(s)
will appear if “Functional
Examiner” and/or “Air
Force Advisor boxes are
marked. If used,
comments are limited to
the space provided.
See paragraph 1.3.3.2.
32
Functional Examiner
and/or Air Force Advisor
Name, Grade, Branch of
Service
Enter the functional
examiner/advisor’s
information as of the
close-out date.
SUE J. DOE, Col, USAF
SALLY S. MESAROS, SES,
DAF
JEREMEY R. DICE, GS-15,
DAF
JACOB M. FREER, Col,
KSANG
33
Functional Examiner
and/or Air Force Advisor
Duty title
Enter the functional
examiner/advisor’s duty
title.
Command Financial Manager
34
Functional Examiner
and/or Air Force Advisor
Signature
The forms have digital
signature and auto-date
capability. In the rare
instance where digital
signatures cannot be
used, sign in
reproducible blue or
black ink and handwrite,
stamp or type the date.
Do not sign blank forms
that do not contain
ratings, sign before the
close-out date (only on or
after), or date before the
date the rater signed it or
earlier than the date of
the ratee’s endorsement
to a referral letter.
Additional rater
assessment block will be
locked, and reviewer
signature capability
unlocked with the
additional rater’s digital
signature.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 125
See paragraph 1.4.12.
Referral Report
35
Referral Report
Comments
Complete this section for
referral evaluations only.
See paragraph 1.10.
36
Referring Evaluator
Name, Grade, and
Branch of Service
Enter the referring
evaluator’s information
as of the SCOD.
However, if the officer
has a PCS or PCA on or
after the accountability
date, use the rater as of
the established
accounting date.
SUE J. DOE, Col, USAF
SALLY S. MESAROS, SES,
DAF
JEREMEY R. DICE, GS-15,
DAF
JACOB M. FREER, Col,
KSANG
37
Referring Evaluator Duty
Title
Enter the referring
evaluator’s information
as of the SCOD.
However, if the officer
has a PCS or PCA on or
after the accountability
date, use the rater as of
the established
accounting date.
Deputy Commander
38
Referring Evaluator
Signature
The evaluations have
digital signature
capability which includes
a date stamp. In the rare
instance where digital
signatures cannot be
used, sign in reproducible
blue or black ink and
handwrite, stamp, or type
the date next to the
signature (DD MMM
YY).
Do not sign blank forms
that do not contain
comments and/or ratings,
sign before the close-out
date (only on or after), or
date before the date the
rater signed it or earlier
than the date of the
ratee’s endorsement to a
126 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
referral letter.
39
Date
Date will auto populate
when report is signed.
27 Mar 2023
40
Signature of Ratee
The evaluations have
digital signature
capability which includes
a date stamp. In the rare
instance where digital
signatures cannot be
used, sign in reproducible
blue or black ink and
handwrite, stamp, or type
the date next to the
signature (DD MMM
YY).
Do not sign blank forms
that do not contain
comments and/or ratings,
sign before the close-out
date (only on or after), or
date before the date the
rater signed it or earlier
than the date of the
ratee’s endorsement to a
referral letter.
41
Date
Date will auto populate
when report is signed.
27 Mar 2023
Note: There are minor formatting differences between the PDF version (AF Form 715) of
the ALQ evaluation and the system generated version completed in myEval.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 127
Table 3.7. Summary of Authorized Stratification Peer Groups.
R
U
L
E
A
B
C
If an evaluator
then the ratee’s primary
stratification is
(See Note 1)
and the
secondary
stratification
may be either
1
has under
their scope of
responsibility
USAF officer(s)
only
grade without descriptor
(e.g., #1/40 Lt Cols) (See
Note 3)
- Duty position
(e.g., #1/6
Flight
Commanders)
(See Note 4),
or
-
Developmental
category grade
(e.g., #1/7
LAF-C Lt
Cols), or
- Subordinate
echelon grade
(e.g., #6/25
WSA Capts)
(HLR only)
See
paragraph
3.15.7.2.
2
USSF officer(s) only
grade without descriptor
(e.g., #1/40 Lt Cols) (See
Note 3)
3
DAF officer(s) (only
USAF and USSF)
“DAF” grade
(e.g., #1/24 DAF Lt Cols)
- USAF or
USSF grade
(e.g., #1/7
USAF Majs),
or
- Duty position
(e.g., #1/6
Flight
Commanders)
(See Note 4),
or
-
Developmental
category grade
(e.g., #1/7
4
Joint officer(s)
(USAF and/or USSF
plus at least one
officer from another
military service)
“Joint” Grade
(e.g., #1/7 Jt Majs)
128 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
LAF-C Lt
Cols), or
- Subordinate
echelon grade
(e.g., #6/25
WSA Capts)
(HLR only)
See
paragraph
3.15.7.2.
5
AFR officers in a
participation
category of IMA,
VLPAD, LEAD, or
EAD
Participation category
grade
(e.g., #1/8 IMA Majs)
See paragraph
3.15.7.1.4.
- Duty position
(e.g., #1/6
Flight
Commanders),
or
-
Developmental
category grade
(e.g., #1/7
LAF-C Lt
Cols), or
- Subordinate
echelon grade
(e.g., #6/25
WSA Capts)
(HLR only)
See
paragraph
3.15.7.2.
6
(RegAF and AFR only) has a ratee
who is a promotion “select”
not authorized
(See Note 3)
- Duty position
(e.g., #1/6
Flight
Commanders)
(See Note 4)
See
paragraphs
3.15.6.6 and
3.15.7.3.1.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 129
7
(RegAF and ARC only) is the same
grade as the ratee, (See Note 2)
(See Note 2) optional for
use by the HLR in
accordance with
paragraph 3.15.7.4.2.
- Duty position
(e.g., #1/6
Flight
Commanders),
(See Note 4)
See
paragraph
3.15.7.2.
Notes:
1. A primary stratification must be used to use a secondary stratification. See paragraphs
3.15.7.3 and 3.15.7.4 for authorized exceptions. (RegAF and ARC only) The primary and
secondary stratification denominators for the HLR may not exceed the number of evaluations
signed by the HLR on that specific SCOD, except for DAF and Joint stratifications as detailed at
paragraph 3.15.7.4.1; neither the primary nor the secondary stratification denominators shall
include all officers within an HLR’s scope of responsibility (e.g., SRID) unless the HLR is a
signatory on the evaluations of all officers within that scope. See paragraph 3.15.7.4.1.
2. (RegAF and ARC only) Optional use of a primary stratification when the rater and ratee are
the same grade is only authorized for the HLR. Duty position is the only authorized secondary
stratification. See paragraph 3.15.7.4.2.
3. Promotion “selects” may be considered in denominator pools for grade stratifications on the
SCOD of the lower (current) grade.
4. Duty position is the only category that stratification denominators may include civilians who
are in a grade equivalent to the officer.
130 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Chapter 4
ENLISTED EVALUATIONS
4.1. General Guidelines.
4.1.1. See Chapter 1 for general processing guidance applicable to all evaluations.
4.1.2. Evaluations are used to determine selections for promotions, job and school
recommendations, career job reservations, reenlistments, retraining, and assignments.
Therefore, evaluators at all levels must use caution to prevent inflation. It is important to
distinguish performance among peers and is a disservice when ratings are inflated or
inaccurate.
4.1.3. Marking Ratings, When Used, on Wet Signature Evaluations. When electronic ratings
are not used, do not enter hand-marked ratings until signing the evaluation to prevent erroneous
entry of ratings by other personnel. When hand-marking, use only reproducible dark blue or
black ink.
4.2. Enlisted Evaluation Forms.
4.2.1. For AB/Spc1 through TSgt, use DAF Form 910. See Table 4.9.
4.2.2. For MSgt (including selects) through SMSgt, use AF Form 911. See Table 4.10.
4.2.3. For CMSgt (including selects).
4.2.3.1. For RegAF and ARC, use myEval to process the ALQ evaluation for CMSgts.
See Table 4.14.
4.2.3.2. For USSF, use AF Form 912. See Table 4.12.
4.3. When to Accomplish an Enlisted Evaluation.
4.3.1. All enlisted personnel in the grade of SrA/Spc4 through CMSgt will receive an
evaluation as of the appropriate SCOD for their grade. ABs/Spc1s, Amn/Spc2s, and
A1Cs/Spc3s will receive an evaluation upon completing a minimum of 36 months time in
service (TIS) as of the SrA/Spc4 SCOD, 31 March.
4.3.2. See Table 4.13 for Premier Band Airmen enlisted evaluation guidance.
4.3.3. The Chief of Staff of the Air Force retains discretionary authority to render evaluations
on an optional basis on the Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force. The Chief of Space
Operations retains discretionary authority to render evaluations on an optional basis on the
Chief Master Sergeant of the Space Force.
4.3.4. Military/Civilian Confinement. HQ AFPC will complete a DAF Form 77 for Airmen
or Guardians who choose to remain in the Air Force or Space Force following overturn of a
sentence adjudged at a court-martial by a subsequent appeals court. The inclusive dates will
be the day after the close-out date of the ratee’s last evaluation through the day the ratee was
returned present for duty status or the date the sentence is overturned, whichever is earlier.
The unit to which the Airman or Guardian transfers following the return to present for duty
will take over performance evaluation responsibilities, beginning the day following DAF Form
77 completion through to the applicable annual SCOD.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 131
4.3.5. Separation/Retirement. Annual evaluations are optional for members with an approved
effective date of separation or retirement that is prior to the next SCOD. If an Airman or
Guardian is promotion eligible, then a report is required. (T-1) Supervisors will consult with
separating or retiring Airmen or Guardians regarding the option to complete a final evaluation.
(T-3) Leadership shall consider the member’s preference when deciding whether or not to
accomplish their final evaluation. (T-3) After consulting with the individual, and the
individual opts not to complete a final evaluation, the supervisor will annotate the DAF Form
910, AF Form 911, AF Form 912, and ALQ evaluation accordingly and process the evaluation
to the lowest level commander for signature. (T-1) Airmen and Guardians are encouraged to
complete a final evaluation for future considerations (e.g., employment, transfer into another
DAF component, or sister service). An evaluation will not be accomplished after a member
has officially separated/retired. (T-1)
4.3.5.1. Complete a final evaluation when requested by the ratee, decided by the rater,
commander, or senior rater, or mandated in accordance with paragraph 1.8. Supervisors
and commanders are responsible for completing mandatory evaluations before members
final out-process or officially separate/retire. (T-1)
4.3.5.2. When a final report will not be rendered, for administrative and tracking purposes,
complete the appropriate evaluation form as follows:
4.3.5.2.1. (For RegAF and ARC only) Include “FINAL REPORT NOT REQUIRED
AND/OR IS NOT MANDATED TO BE RENDERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH
DAFI 36-2406, PARA 1.8,” the first rater’s assessment block, “Executing the Mission”
on the CMSgt ALQ evaluation. Include “THIS SECTION NOT USED,” in the
remaining rater’s and HLR’s assessment blocks on the CMSgt ALQ evaluation.
4.3.5.2.2. (USSF only) Include “FINAL REPORT NOT REQUIRED AND/OR IS
NOT MANDATED TO BE RENDERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH DAFI 36-2406,
PARA 1.8,” in Sections III, IV, and V of DAF Form 910, Sections III and IV of AF
Form 911, Section II of AF Form 912. Performance assessment ratings are not
required.
4.3.5.2.3. (RegAF and ARC only) The member, rater, HLR will endorse the report
no earlier than 30 calendars days before the member’s final-out process, or before the
member officially separates/retires. (T-1) (USSF only) The member and the lowest
level commander will endorse the report no earlier than 30 calendar days before the
member’s final out-process or before the member officially separates/retires. (T-1)
4.4. Evaluations not Authorized. Performance evaluations will not be accomplished on the
following:
4.4.1. RegAF and USSF personnel in the grade of AB/Spc1-A1C/Spc3 with less than 36
months total active federal military service as of the SrA/Spc4 SCOD and ARC personnel in
the grades of AB-A1C if they have not already received an evaluation. See paragraph
4.7.3.1.4 and Table 4.2 for exceptions.
4.4.2. Members who die while on active duty. Exception: If the death occurred on or after
the close-out date of an evaluation that was already being processed, it becomes an optional
evaluation.
132 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
4.4.3. Commissioning Program. Airmen or Guardians who are enrolled in a commissioning
program as of the SCOD. Note: If an Airman or Guardian does not complete a program and
is returned to enlisted service, complete a DBH enlisted evaluation, effective the date of
removal by the commissioning program, documenting the performance that resulted in
removal from the program.
4.4.4. Airmen or Guardians in prisoner or confinement status as a result of a court-martial
conviction, who have PCS’d and are gained to a long-term confinement facility managed by
the Air Force Security Forces Center. Note: Airmen or Guardians awaiting publication of a
sentence adjudged at a court-martial will remain the administrative responsibility of the losing
unit commander/director until such time as the sentence adjudged at a court-martial is
published and the member is officially transferred to an Air Force Security Forces Center
managed correctional facility. These Airmen or Guardians will still require SCOD evaluations
(as applicable), completed by the losing commander/director.
4.4.5. Airmen or Guardians undergoing appellate review leave and awaiting an appeals court
decision and still permanently assigned to an Air Force Security Forces Center-managed
confinement facility.
4.5. When to Submit an Enlisted Evaluation.
4.5.1. See Table 4.2 for RegAF Airmen, ARC Airmen on AGR or Stat Tour, and USSF
Guardians.
4.5.2. See Table 4.3 for part-time ARC Airmen.
4.6. “FROM” Dates. Establish the “FROM” date if the member:
4.6.1. Has a previous evaluation on file, use the day after the close-out date of the previous
evaluation.
4.6.2. For RegAF Airmen and USSF Guardians who have not had a previous evaluation, the
“FROM” date equals the total active federal military service date.
4.6.3. For United States Air Force Academy Airmen or Guardians removed from cadet status
and returned to enlisted grade the “FROM” date equals the extended active duty date.
4.6.4. For AFR members who have not had a previous evaluation, use the member’s date of
assignment to the ARC. For SrA and below use the date initial entry uniformed services.
4.6.5. For ANG SrA and below who have not had a previous evaluation, the “FROM” date
equals the date initial entry uniformed services. SSgt through CMSgt who are transferred from
any branch or component, the “FROM” date equals date arrive station.
4.7. “THRU” Dates.
4.7.1. Initial Reports.
4.7.1.1. For RegAF and USSF the close-out date will be the first SCOD after the Airman
or Guardian attains the grade of SrA/Spc4 or reaches 36 months time in service as of the
SCOD (whichever occurs first).
4.7.1.2. For ARC the close-out date will be the first SCOD reached as a SrA.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 133
4.7.2. Annual/Biennial Reports.
4.7.2.1. Reports for RegAF and USSF Members. Reports will close-out on the next
appropriate SCOD unless selected for promotion. Those on a select list will have their
evaluation close-out on the appropriate SCOD for their promotion selected grade.
Example: The SSgt/Sgt SCOD is 31 Jan; therefore, SSgt/Sgt evaluations will close-out
on that date. However, TSgt selects (SSgts/Sgts with a line number) will have their
evaluations close-out on the TSgt SCOD on 30 Nov.
4.7.2.2. Reports for ARC Members. Reports will close-out on the appropriate SCOD. If
a promotion, demotion or transfer out of inactive/active occurs and there is more than 24
months (12 months for AGR) from the last evaluation and the SCOD for the new grade, a
DBH report is required. The close out is the day prior to when the status occurred.
Example: An AGR MSgt is promoted to SMSgt effective 1 Sep 23. A DBH report will
be required to close out 31 Aug 23 because the member will have more than 12 months
from the last evaluation and the new static close-out date for the new grade.
4.7.3. For Directed by Headquarters, NGB, or Commander (MAJCOM/FLDCOM,
wing/delta, group, or squadron, as appropriate) reports, the “THRU” date will be established
by the following:
4.7.3.1. Message Directed. Use the date specified in the message directing the evaluation.
4.7.3.1.1. Missing-in-Action/Captured/Detained. Use the date the ratee was placed in
missing-in-action, captured, or detained in captive status.
4.7.3.1.2. Stripes for Exceptional Performers or supplemental promotions. If an
Airman or Guardian is Stripes for Exceptional Performers-promoted or selected for
supplemental promotion to the next higher grade, and if completing an evaluation on
the next SCOD in the new grade will create a reporting period of longer than one year,
then a DBH enlisted evaluation must be completed with a close-out date effective the
date of Stripes for Exceptional Performers promotion or the date which the results of
the supplemental were released. Examples:
4.7.3.1.2.1. SSgt/Sgt McDaniel was selected for supplemental promotion or
Stripes for Exceptional Performers promoted to TSgt on 15 Apr 23 and SSgt/Sgt
McDaniel had an enlisted evaluation on the SSgt/Sgt SCOD date of 31 Jan 23, then
no enlisted evaluation is required as TSgt (or TSgt select) McDaniel will receive a
performance evaluation on 30 Nov 23 (TSgt SCOD).
4.7.3.1.2.2. SSgt/Sgt Snowden was selected for supplemental promotion or Stripes
for Exceptional Performers promoted to TSgt on 10 Jan 23. TSgt (or TSgt select)
Snowden’s last evaluation was completed on the 31 Jan 22 (SSgt SCOD) and the
next projected enlisted evaluation is the 30 Nov 23 (TSgt SCOD). Since this creates
a rating period of longer than one year, a DBH enlisted evaluation is required with
a close-out date effective the date of the supplemental release/Stripes for
Exceptional Performers promotion date.
4.7.3.1.3. If an Airman or Guardian is demoted after the SCOD of the grade held prior
to demotion, an enlisted evaluation will be completed as of the previous grade’s SCOD
and, subsequently, as of the SCOD of the new grade. Example: TSgt Smith is
134 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
demoted to SSgt/Sgt effective 5 Dec 23. The now-SSgt/Sgt Smith will receive an
evaluation on the TSgt SCOD of 30 Nov 23 and, subsequently, on the SSgt/Sgt SCOD
of 31 Jan 24.
4.7.3.1.4. Directed by Commander (DBC). The close-out date will be established by
the unit commander that directed the evaluation. (T-1) DBC evaluations provide
flexibility to commanders to document substandard performance between SCODs as
an embedded report at the SCODs and will only contain comments and ratings
regarding the reason(s) for the evaluation. (T-1) All other comments, specifically those
that are positive, and promotion recommendations are not authorized and will be
documented on the next SCOD evaluation. (T-1) Note: A1C/Spc3 or below with less
than 36 months total active federal military service (or date initial entry uniformed
services for ARC) do not receive an enlisted evaluation unless the member has a
minimum of 20 months TIS.
4.7.4. 365-day Extended Deployment Enlisted Evaluations. Note: These instructions apply
only to those individuals who are selected to fill an official extended deployment requirement.
(T-1) These instructions will not be used for individuals filling other requirements, even
though they may be extended to, or beyond 365-days. (T-1)
4.7.4.1. Home Station Rating Chain Responsibilities Prior to Departure. If the deployed
rater is known prior to departure, the CSS/HR specialist will update the deployed rater.
(T-1) In most cases, however, the deployed rater will not be known until the member
arrives to the deployed location. (T-1) In that case, use the home station commander as a
temporary rater. This will facilitate home station and deployed commander’s direct line of
communication to ensure the rating chain is established and updated in a timely manner.
Example: If the data is not updated immediately, a feedback notification report on
individual personnel will be produced within 30 days, and that alone should act as a
reminder to the commander that the deployed data needs to be updated. (T-1)
4.7.4.2. Upon Arrival in the Area of Responsibility (AOR). The home station CSS/HR
specialist will coordinate with the deployed PERSCO team and update MilPDS to reflect
the member’s deployed duty title and DAFSC/DSFSC effective the date the member
arrives in the AOR. (T-1) They will also update the deployed rater if the rater was unknown
prior to departure. (T-1) All updates should be completed as soon as possible but no later
than 30 days after the member arrives in the AOR.
4.7.4.2.1. Duty Title Format. All extended deployment personnel duty titles will be
standardized to reflect the extended deployment “duty title/country” assigned. (T-1) If
space allows, include the unit assigned. Example: “Senior Enlisted Leader, 442
ECS/Iraq” or “Comm Specialist, GSU/Afghanistan.”
4.7.4.2.2. When determining the deployed rater, the rater should typically be the
person who directly supervises the individual’s day-to-day activities. The unit that
owns the unit line number (ULN) will determine the rater. (T-1) Raters may be in any
United States or foreign military service or a civilian in a supervisory position and must
be in a grade equal to or higher than the ratee. (T-1) In accordance with 10 USC 9013,
DAFI 51-509 and Joint Publication 1, SecAF is responsible for the ADCON, and
support of DAF forces assigned or attached to combatant commands. (T-0) ADCON
is the authority necessary to fulfill SecAF’s statutory responsibilities for administration
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 135
and support. In joint environments, an Air Force or Space Force unit will be designated
to have ADCON responsibilities over Airmen or Guardians. (T-1) ADCON
responsibilities include personnel management. With regard to evaluations, this
involves managing the evaluation program, ensuring evaluations are accomplished on
individuals on extended deployments as well as decorations and informal LOEs
processed per local and air component command or MAJCOM/FLDCOM direction.
ADCON responsibility does not necessarily extend to writing the evaluations on those
attached to the Air Force or Space Force unit for ADCON purposes.
4.7.4.3. Upon Return from the AOR:
4.7.4.3.1. The home station CSS/HR specialist will change the member’s rater,
DAFSC/DSFSC, and duty title in MilPDS to reflect home station (post-deployment)
information. (T-1)
4.7.4.3.2. The home station forced distributor will continue to complete the
commander’s review/reviewer’s (senior rater) portion of all evaluations, including
those completed by the deployed rating chain. (T-1)
4.7.4.4. Forced Distributor/Senior Rater Responsibilities. The forced distributor/senior
rater matched to the ratee’s home station PAS code must perform forced distributor/senior
rater duties (enlisted personnel will be on the home station forced distributor/senior rater’s
MEL). (T-1)
4.8. Number of Days of Supervision.
4.8.1. Enter the number of days the rater supervised the ratee during the reporting period. To
compute, use the “supervision began date” through the “close-out date” to determine the
number of days of supervision.
4.8.2. Do not deduct any periods of leave, TDY, absences or periods loaned out to other
organizations. Exception: Non-rated periods authorized in accordance with paragraph
1.4.11.
4.8.3. When the rater’s rater prepares an enlisted evaluation in accordance with paragraph
1.7, enter number of days for which the evaluator had personal or written knowledge of the
ratee's duty performance during the reporting period.
4.9. Completing Evaluations. The rater will evaluate how well the ratee performed during the
rating period by completing the rater assessment section of the CMSgt ALQ evaluation and Forms
910/911/912; however, the additional evaluators will review evaluations to ensure ratings
accurately describe performance and comments are compatible with/support the performance
assessment rating. They must return evaluations with unsupported statements for additional
information or reconsideration of ratings (see paragraph 1.9 for disagreements); however, no
evaluator may coerce another into changing their comments or ratings unless they are missing
mandatory comments (paragraph 1.11), or the evaluation includes prohibited comments
(paragraph 1.12). (T-1)
4.10. Promotion Time-In-Grade (TIG)/Time-In-Service (TIS) eligibility (DAF Form 910
only).
4.10.1. This block is based on TIG/TIS eligibility not promotion eligibility.
136 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
4.10.2. TIG/TIS is based on promotion requirements as of the SCOD. The rater completes
this portion of the DAF Form 910 and marks the block “YES” or “NO” based on eligibility.
4.10.3. Stratification statements are prohibited on DAF Form 910.
4.11. Time-In-Grade (TIG)/Senior Rater Stratification/Endorsement Eligibility (AF Form
911 only).
4.11.1. Senior rater stratification/endorsement is not automatic or mandatory. The decision to
forward the evaluation for senior rater stratification/endorsement is determined by the
evaluator who is eligible to close-out the evaluation and each level thereafter, without
necessarily going to the senior rater. (USSF only) Do not utilize senior rater
stratification/endorsement; the SF/S1 will notify the USSF senior raters when they are
authorized to utilize senior rater stratification/endorsement process and procedures prior to
each accounting date.
4.11.1.1. The commander or director of the organization in which the ratee is assigned,
who meets the grade requirements to close-out the report, determines if a report will be
forwarded for stratification consideration. If the report is not forwarded to the senior rater
for stratification, the commander or director will close out (sign) the report.
4.11.1.2. When a senior rater determines senior rater stratification is warranted, they will
close out the report by completing Section IX. Numerical indications of how an individual
member compares to their peers (typically known as “stratification statements,” e.g., #1/10)
may be included in Section VIII, but are not required. If senior rater
endorsement/stratification is not warranted, the report will be returned for close-out (sign)
by a major or GS-12/NH-03 or higher. (T-1)
4.11.1.3. Stratification statements by anyone other than the senior rater are prohibited, to
include all lower-level stratification on evaluations endorsed by the senior rater.
Stratification statements based on percentage, career field, or functional community are
prohibited. Example: It is not appropriate to use “#1 SNCO” or “#1 First Sergeant.”
4.11.2. Senior raters can stratify up to 10% of TIG/TIS-eligible MSgts and up to 20% of
TIG/TIS-eligible SMSgts within their SRID and by component. Note: RegAF Airmen with
an approved high year of tenure retirement date prior to the first day of the month promotion
increments begin will not be factored into senior rater allocations. When determining the
quota, normal rounding rules apply (.49 rounds down to the whole number and .50 rounds up
to the whole number). The ratee must meet all of the following minimum requirements as of
the close-out date of the evaluation (except as authorized by paragraph 4.12.4.2 due to forced
endorsements):
4.11.2.1. Meet the TIG eligibility requirements outlined in Table 4.11.
4.11.2.2. Successfully completed an Associate’s or higher-level degree from a nationally
or regionally accredited academic institution in any discipline or specialty. The degree
must be conferred (awarded) as of the close-out date of the evaluation. Completing the last
required course, College Level Examination Program, or Defense Activity for Non-
Traditional Education Services is not sufficient.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 137
4.11.3. On the AF Form 911, if a senior rater is stratifying a SNCO as the top 10% of
promotion eligible MSgts or top 20% of promotion eligible SMSgts, Block B, then they may
include a written stratification statement in Section IX, Final Evaluator’s Comments.
4.11.3.1. When a stratification statement is used, it must include a numerator and
denominator designation stating where the SNCO falls (numerator) within the senior rater’s
pool of TIG/TIS promotion eligible SNCOs (denominator), by grade. Example: “My
#1/25 MSgts.” In joint organizations, the stratification statement may include joint
members of the same grade. If a senior rater does not provide a stratification in Section
IX, Block B, they may not provide a stratification statement. (T-3)
4.11.3.2. If used, joint stratification statements must reference the joint population.
Example: #1/20 joint E-7s or #2/10 joint E-8s. When a rater has both, and only, USAF
and USSF SNCOs of the same grade subordinate to them, the use of “DAF” in lieu of
“Joint” as a stratification category is authorized since Joint is not permissible among only
USAF and USSF SNCOs. However, “DAF” may not be used as a stratification category
if there are any other sister service SNCOs in the same grade and subordinate to the same
rater.
4.11.3.3. Raters with USAF and USSF SNCOs in the same grade as other sister services
are not authorized to use “DAF” to stratify just the USAF and USSF SNCOs of the same
grade within their scope of supervision. These raters may only use “Joint” as a stratification
category and must include all SNCOs in the same grade from all sister services under their
scope of supervision. (T-1) See paragraph 1.12 for prohibited evaluator considerations
and comments.
4.11.4. A senior rater will endorse a non-TIG/TIS-eligible evaluation only when one of the
following apply:
4.11.4.1. When the senior rater is the rater. In this case, the senior rater will mark the
“Forced Endorsement” box on the AF Form 911. (T-2)
4.11.4.2. When the senior rater is the evaluator named in a referral memorandum. (T-2)
4.11.5. If the member is not TIG/TIS-eligible for a senior rater stratification/endorsement, the
commander/director or major or GS-12/NH-03 or higher will close out (sign) the report.
4.11.6. Determine TIG/TIS eligibility for senior rater stratification/endorsement using the
formulas below. See the TIG Eligibility Chart, Table 4.11.
4.11.6.1. For MSgt ratees (RegAF and USSF only).
4.11.6.1.1. If the close-out date is on or before 30 Sep, determine the number of months
TIG from date of rank (DOR) to 1 Mar of the next year following the evaluation close-
out date. If less than 20 months, then TIG eligibility is “NO.” If greater than or equal
to 20 months, then TIG eligibility is “YES.” All Airmen meeting a promotion board
are required to have an enlisted evaluation on file closed out within 12 months of the
promotion eligibility cutoff date.
4.11.6.1.2. If the close-out date is after 30 Sep, determine the number of months TIG
from the date of rank to 1 Mar two years following the evaluation close-out date. If
less than 20 months, TIG eligibility is “NO.” If greater than or equal to 20 months,
TIG eligibility is “YES.” All Airmen meeting a promotion board are required to have
138 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
an enlisted evaluation on file closed out within 12 months of the promotion eligibility
cutoff date.
4.11.6.2. For SMSgt Ratees (RegAF and USSF only).
4.11.6.2.1. If the close-out date is on or before 31 Jul, determine the number of months
TIG from the date of rank to 1 Dec. If less than 21 months, then promotion TIG/TIS
eligibility is “NO.” If greater than or equal to 21 months, then promotion TIG/TIS
eligibility is “YES.”
4.11.6.2.2. If the close-out date is after 31 Jul, determine the number of months TIG
from the date of rank to 1 Dec of the year following the evaluation close-out date. If
less than 21 months, promotion TIG/TIS eligibility is “NO.” If greater than or equal to
21 months, promotion TIG/TIS eligibility is “YES.” All Airmen and Guardians
meeting a promotion board are required to have an enlisted evaluation on file closed
out within 12 months of the promotion eligibility cutoff date. (T-1)
4.11.6.3. For SMSgt promotion selects (RegAF and USSF only). Promotion TIG/TIS
eligibility is based upon the SCOD of the enlisted evaluation. If the SCOD falls on the day
of or day after the promotion public release date (to include supplemental promotions),
individuals on the selectee list are not eligible for senior rater endorsement on that
evaluation. Conversely, if the SCOD enlisted evaluation closed out prior to the promotion
public release date, the member is eligible for senior rater endorsement because they were
still a MSgt as of the SCOD and not officially a SMSgt promotion selectee.
4.11.6.4. Senior raters must either use the following approved panel process (paragraph
4.11.6.4.1) to determine senior rater stratification/endorsement or develop and disseminate
their own guidance within their organization no later than the accounting date of each
evaluation cycle. (T-1)
4.11.6.4.1. Review the last five evaluations, all awards and decorations, the current
myFitness individual report, and career data brief (CDB). (T-1) Panel members will
include the senior raters’ command chief or senior enlisted advisor, as well as the
commander/director who submitted the evaluation for senior rater
stratification/endorsement consideration. (T-1)
4.11.6.4.2. RegAF Airmen and USSF Guardians with an approved high year of tenure
retirement date prior to the first day of the month promotion increments begin are no
longer considered eligible for senior rater endorsement and will not be factored into
senior rater endorsement allocations. (T-1)
4.11.6.5. CMSgt and CMSgt-selects. The senior rater must endorse all CMSgt ALQ
evaluations (USAF) or AF Form 912s (USSF). (T-2)
4.12. Final Evaluator’s Position and Single Evaluators.
4.12.1. The minimum grade of a final evaluator must be an O-4 or GS-12/NH-03 or higher,
but no higher in organization than the senior rater. (T-1) When the report has a single
evaluator, then the final evaluator must be the senior rater and may not be delegated to a lower-
level evaluator. (T-1) Exception: The SNCOA Commandant is designated as the final
evaluator when the AF Form 911 is not endorsed/stratified by the senior rater or the SNCO is
non-promotion eligible. The SNCOA Commandant is also authorized to sign Section IX of
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 139
DAF Form 910 for non-promotion eligible Airmen or if an enlisted force distribution is not
warranted. Furthermore, if a ratee is not promotion eligible, or if a senior rater endorsement
and/or stratification is not warranted, the SNCOA Commandant may act as the final evaluator
on MSgt and SMSgt enlisted evaluations within their direct rating chain and/or scope of
responsibility. Note: For ANG members, the final evaluator must be at a minimum the full-
time unit commander. (T-1) If there is no full-time unit commander, the final endorser will be
the senior full-time officer serving in the grade of O-4/GS-12/NH-03 or higher, but no higher
in organization than the senior rater. (T-1) For reviewers assigned on or prior to the close-out
date, enter information as of the close-out date; if assigned after the close-out date, enter the
information as of the date signed. Exception: The CMSAF or CMSSF may endorse enlisted
evaluations as a senior rater and may also serve as the final evaluator.
4.12.2. Single Evaluator Only. An evaluator must be an O-6 or GS-15/equivalent. (T-1) If
the rater is a senior rater, the evaluation must close out at this level unless it is a referral
evaluation. (T-1) The evaluator must meet both grade and evaluator requirements for each
section of the applicable evaluation form and must be a commander/director/other authorized
reviewer. (T-1) An O-6/equivalent may serve as a final evaluator on the AF Form 911, and/or
as a final evaluator/senior rater on the AF Forms 911 and 912 and the CMSgt ALQ evaluation
if they are designated as a senior rater. They must also meet the necessary requirements as a
commander/director/other authorized reviewer to sign the entire evaluation as a single
evaluator. (T-1) Single evaluators will enter “THIS SECTION NOT USED” in the additional
rater comment section and sign each section.
4.12.3. An additional rater who meets the minimum grade requirement may close out the
evaluation. However, an official higher in the rating chain than the additional rater may serve
as the reviewer/final evaluator, if authorized. The reviewer/final evaluator may not be higher
in the organizational structure than the senior rater. (T-1)
4.12.4. Determining the Final Evaluator:
4.12.4.1. Commander/Director. The individual in the ratee’s rating chain who meets the
grade requirement to complete the final endorsement on the enlisted evaluation. For MSgt
– SMSgt, a civilian final evaluator must be at least a GS-12/NH-03. (T-1) Example: Unit
Commanders not in the grade of O-6/civilian equivalent; MAJCOM/FLDCOM section
chiefs below the division which are not in the grade of O-6/civilian equivalent. The
SNCOA Commandant is designated as the final evaluator when the AF Form 911 is not
endorsed/stratified by the senior rater or the SNCO is non-promotion eligible. The SNCOA
Commandant is also authorized to sign Section IX of DAF Form 910 for non-promotion
eligible Airmen or Guardians or if an enlisted force distribution is not warranted.
Furthermore, if a ratee is not promotion eligible, or if a senior rater endorsement and/or
stratification is not warranted, the SNCOA Commandant may act as the final evaluator on
MSgt and SMSgt evaluations within their direct rating chain and/or scope of responsibility.
4.12.4.1.1. (Forms 910, 911, and 912 only) When the rater, additional rater, and/or
unit commander/military or civilian director/other authorized reviewer is also the final
evaluator, or qualifies as a final evaluator, and closes out the evaluation, they will
complete Section VIII, Unit Commander/Military or Civilian Director/Other
Authorized Reviewer’s Comments, and Section IX, Final Evaluator’s Comments, to
140 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
include allowing placement of the optional bullet, in each corresponding section if they
decide not to include performance comments.
4.12.4.1.2. (Forms 910, 911, and 912 only) When the rater is the unit
commander/equivalent, does not qualify as a single evaluator, and works directly for
the senior rater, they will complete both the rater’s and commander’s areas. The senior
rater will complete the additional rater’s and final evaluator’s areas.
4.12.4.2. Senior Rater. Used when the final evaluator is the highest-level endorser in the
ratee’s rating chain. The senior rater must be at least an O-6/GS-15/NH-04 or higher,
serving as a wing commander or equivalent, and designated by the management level.
4.12.4.3. Senior Rater Forced Endorsement. This block will be marked when the senior
rater must complete Section IX, Final Evaluator’s Comments, of the AF Form 911, whether
or not the ratee is TIG/TIS promotion-eligible or has completed the minimum requirements
for senior rater stratification/endorsement, due to rating chain or final evaluator
requirements.
4.12.5. The final evaluator ensures the correct final evaluator’s position block is marked prior
to signing the enlisted evaluation. (T-1)
4.12.6. Evaluators with Dual or Multiple Roles. When an evaluator serves in multiple roles
on Forms 910, 911, 912, or CMSgt ALQ evaluation, or when the additional rater is also the
commander/director, consider each section of the evaluation independently. The evaluator
may include written comments in each separate section of the evaluation. When an evaluator
chooses not to include performance comments in a section, they will enter “THIS SECTION
NOT USED” in the applicable section and sign. (T-1) Signature elements, to include the
signature, are required in all sections of the evaluation regardless of whether there are
performance comments included, or the evaluator has entered “THIS SECTION NOT USED.”
Note: For single evaluators, refer to paragraph 4.12.2..
4.13. Performance Feedback Assessment.
4.13.1. Performance feedback assessments will be accomplished in accordance with Chapter
2.
4.13.2. In Section VII (DAF Form 910), Section VI (AF Form 911), and Section III (AF Form
912) the rater certifies that the required performance feedback assessment was conducted
during the reporting period by signing. If the feedback assessment was not accomplished, an
explanation must be provided in the remarks block (Forms 910/911/912). For the CMSgt ALQ
evaluation, performance feedback assessments are certified in myEval.
4.14. Forced Distributor, (Section IX, DAF Form 910) Unit Commander/Military or Civilian
Director/Other Authorized Reviewer, (Section VIII, AF Form 911).
4.14.1. The review is performed by the commander/director of the organization. In the
commander’s/director's absence, the officer on G-series orders or a senior official within the
commander's jurisdiction, may review. Members designated to complete this section may not
use the title "Commander" or "Director." They will use their assigned duty title on the enlisted
evaluation. Home station commanders will complete this section for members on a 365-day
extended deployment, regardless of the grade of the deployed rater and additional rater.
Additionally, forced distributors may delegate, in writing, the final signature authority to the
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 141
operations officer or squadron section commander (equivalents) for Airmen and Guardians
who are not TIG/TIS eligible for promotion during the current evaluation cycle.
4.14.1.1. The forced distributor as of the SCOD will sign all DAF Form 910s assigned to
their Forced Distributor Identification for TIG/TIS eligible Airmen (see paragraph 4.12.1
and paragraph 4.12.4.1 for exceptions regarding SNCOA commandants). If the forced
distributor appointed another officer/civilian to represent them at the Enlisted Forced
Distribution Panel, the signature authority is still the forced distributor. Exception: In
joint agencies, the AFELM/CC on G-series orders is authorized to sign DAF Form 910s in
lieu of the forced distributor when the forced distributor signs the MEL.
4.14.2. The commander reviews evaluations to ensure ratings accurately describe performance
and comments and are compatible with and support ratings. They must return evaluations with
unsupported statements for additional information or reconsideration of ratings. (T-1)
However, commanders may not coerce an evaluator to make changes.
4.14.3. The commander or designated representative will mark the “concur” or “non-concur”
block. See paragraph 1.9 for disagreements.
4.14.4. Forced Distributors or Commanders/Directors may have multiple roles. The two
signatures serve separate purposes: one as an evaluator regarding duty performance, and one
as a commander regarding quality review. If the forced distributor/unit commander/director
qualifies as a single evaluator, enter “THIS SECTION NOT USED” in the additional rater
comment section. Signature elements, to include the signature, are required in all sections of
the evaluation regardless of whether there are performance comments included, or the
evaluator has entered “THIS SECTION NOT USED”. (T-1)
4.15. Evaluator Considerations and Comments. Certain items are prohibited for consideration
in the performance evaluation process and will not be commented upon on any Enlisted Evaluation
System form. Except as authorized in the following paragraphs, do not consider, refer to, or
include comments regarding:
4.15.1. (AF Form 911) Promotion Statements and Assignment Recommendations.
Promotion statements are only allowed when a senior noncommissioned officer is TIG/TIS
promotion-eligible and may only be made by the final evaluator in Section IX, Final
Evaluator’s Comments. (T-1) When the rater qualifies as a single evaluator, they may include
a promotion statement in Section IX, Final Evaluator’s Comments. Promotion statements on
promotion selectee evaluations are prohibited. (T-1) Promotion statements must refer to the
ratee’s next higher grade. Assignment recommendations are authorized regardless of TIG/TIS
eligibility. Authorized examples include:
4.15.1.1. For a TIG/TIS promotion eligible MSgt, the final evaluator may state, “promote
to SMSgt, then select for Flight Chief” as it states the next eligible grade and assignment.
4.15.1.2. For a MSgt not TIG/TIS promotion eligible, the final evaluator may not state,
"promote to SMSgt, future Command Chief," as the ratee is not TIG/TIS eligible and the
assignment recommendation is a CMSgt position. (T-1)
4.15.1.3. Final evaluators may also provide assignment recommendations in their
comments. Similar to promotion statements, assignment recommendations may only be
made by the final evaluator and may only refer to the positions in the ratee’s current grade
142 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
if not promotion eligible. (T-1) If the ratee is promotion eligible or a selectee, assignment
recommendations may be made for positions in the current and selected grade.
4.15.2. (DAF Form 910) Promotion Statements in Section IX, Item 1, that are statements of
fact (e.g., “selected for promotion Below-the-Promotion Zone” or “STEP promoted to TSgt”)
are authorized. Additionally, recommendations of “pushes" to commissioning sources are also
authorized (e.g., Selected for Officer Training School). Note: Promotion pushes to the next
higher grade are prohibited.
4.15.3. Performance comments regarding an Airman or Guardian serving in a
ceremonial/event-related position that has a “title” higher than the grade the Airman or
Guardian currently holds is acceptable. Examples: An Honor Guard SrA/Spc4 serving as
Noncommissioned Officer-in-Charge, Firing Team or Noncommissioned Officer-in-Charge,
Colors during a ceremony. A SSgt/Sgt serving as the First Sergeant of the Mess at a formal
Order of the Sword Ceremony.
4.16. Inappropriate Comments Referring to Separation/Retirement, Civilian Employment,
and Professional Military Education.
4.16.1. Separation or retirement status. Comments referring to separation, retirement, or
transfer to reserve status are prohibited. (T-1) However, comments may be warranted when
an Airman or Guardian displays a reluctance to accept responsibility, a negative attitude toward
the job, and/or exhibits a decrease in performance that can be reasonably attributed to a pending
separation or retirement. Comments are limited to the behavior and not the fact the Airman or
Guardian is separating, retiring or transferring to a reserve status. Note: Although comments
are mandatory, the minimum bullets required in accordance with Tables 4.2, 4.6, or 4.9 may
be used.
4.16.2. Civilian Employment. Comments about civil service jobs or other civilian occupations
are prohibited unless it directly relates to the military position and their military performance.
Recommendations for civilian employment are prohibited. (T-1)
4.16.3. Enlisted Professional Military Education Comments in Enlisted Evaluations.
4.16.3.1. The only permissible professional military education comments in enlisted
evaluations will be those referencing selections for an official professional military
education award or completion of Senior Enlisted Joint Professional Military Education
I/II web-based courses. All other comments, to include recommendation for any other
professional military education and selection for any other professional military education
attendance are prohibited. Comments referencing Air Force or Space Force prerequisite
professional military education (or sister service equivalent) selection, attendance and/or
completion are prohibited, to include implied comments.
4.17. Ratee’s Acknowledgement.
4.17.1. The rater is required to conduct face-to-face (end-of-reporting period) feedback in
conjunction with presenting the evaluation to the ratee. (T-1) The enlisted evaluation serves
as the feedback form. A performance feedback assessment form is not required. Electronic
routing of the form does not excuse the rater from providing face-to-face feedback. Only in
situations where face-to-face feedback is not feasible will feedback be conducted either by
telephone or electronically. (T-2) The rater should first attempt to call the ratee and conduct
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 143
the feedback via telephone. If that option is not available, the rater may provide clear, detailed
feedback to the ratee via email, using a read receipt to verify the feedback was received and
read.
4.17.2. The ratee’s signature in the acknowledgment block does not constitute concurrence or
non-concurrence of the content and/or rating of the evaluation. The signature is to
acknowledge receipt of the evaluation and to certify the ratee reviewed the personal
information on the form.
4.17.3. The ratee will sign after all other evaluators have signed. In cases where an Air
Force/Space Force advisor or acquisition/functional examiner is required to sign, the ratee’s
acknowledgment will occur after the advisor or examiner review.
4.17.4. The ratee must acknowledge receipt of the evaluation prior to the evaluation becoming
a matter of record unless the ratee refuses or is unable to sign. The ratee will review and verify
all dates, markings, and comments on the form. Significant discrepancies and administrative
errors can be addressed at this time, and corrected if agreed by all parties before the evaluation
becomes a matter of record. This is not to be interpreted to mean the ratee can refuse to sign
if they disagree with the evaluation. If evaluators do not agree to change the evaluation and
the ratee wishes to dispute it, the ratee should pursue the established appeal/correction avenues
available to them as outlined in Chapter 10 once the evaluation is a matter of record.
4.17.5. The rater will suspense the ratee three duty days (30 calendar days for ARC) to sign
the evaluation. (T-1)
4.17.6. In cases where the ratee refuses to sign, any evaluator signing the evaluation is
authorized to select “Ratee refused” from the drop-down menu in the ratee’s acknowledgment
and sign the evaluation in the ratee’s acknowledgement block.
4.17.7. In cases where the ratee is unable to sign, any evaluator will select “Not available”
from the drop-down menu in the ratee’s acknowledgment block and sign the evaluation in the
ratee’s acknowledgement block.
4.17.8. For the purpose of signing evaluations, the terms “Unavailable” or “Unable to Sign”
indicate that the member does not have access to a common access card-enabled computer
(e.g., convalescent leave, TDY to a contractor facility without government computer access,
deployed to a location without computer access, no longer have digital signature capability, in
absent without leave or deserter status, etc.).
4.17.9. “Wet Signature Evaluations Only.” Evaluators can type, handwrite or use the drop-
down option to annotate the evaluation when the ratee is unable or declines to sign.
4.18. Forced Distribution (DAF Form 910 only).
4.18.1. Terms and Definitions.
4.18.1.1. Forced Distribution. The allocation of the top two promotion recommendations,
“Promote Now” and “Must Promote,” from a force distributor on DAF Form 910 for
promotion eligible SrA, Spc4s, SSgts, Sgts, and TSgts.
4.18.1.1.1. (USSF only) For Spc4s, Sgts, and TSgts only, utilize promotion
recommendations of “Not Read Now” (NRN) or “Promote” (P); do not utilize
promotion recommendations—"Promote Now” (PN) and “Must Promote” (MP).
144 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
4.18.1.1.2. (USSF only) FDs for Guardians will discontinue the use of the EFDP
process and procedures. The SF/S1 directs the USSF when to utilize the EFDP process
and procedures prior to each accounting date.
4.18.1.2. Forced Distributor (FD). For wing/delta/space base delta/group/squadron-level
organizational structures, the FD will be the G-series orders commander or civilian director
(delegable to section commander or equivalent only for non-TIG/TIS eligible members).
For wings or deltas, the FD is the vice commander, delegable to the director of staff. Within
MAJCOMs, FLDCOMs, CCMDs, FOAs, DRUs, NAFs, and centers, the FD will be the
military or civilian director. For MAJCOM, FLDCOM, and CCMD commanders, the FD
will be the vice commander.
4.18.1.3. Forced Distributor Identification (FDID). A nine-digit code annotated on the
DAF Form 910. It is assigned to a position/PAS codes and identifies the FD.
4.18.1.4. Enlisted Forced Distribution Panel (EFDP). The EFDP is comprised of the
EFDP president, command chief or Air Force senior enlisted leader (SEL), FDs of small
units (flight chiefs/designated representatives for large units), and recorder.
4.18.1.5. Master Eligibility Listing (MEL). Identifies all Airmen or Guardians with an
enlisted evaluation scheduled to close out on the applicable SCOD as well as Airmen or
Guardians who are and are not TIG/TIS-eligible. The listing also reflects the number of
promotion allocations earned.
4.18.1.6. Accounting Date. The date approximately 120 calendar days before the SCOD.
This date is used as a file freeze in order to account for the actual number of eligible
TIG/TIS promotion-eligible Airmen or Guardians for each FD’s PAS code(s). No changes
will be made to the number of allocations on or after the SCOD unless specifically
authorized by HQ AFPC/DP3SP as an exception. (T-1) See Table 4.6.
4.18.1.7. Static Close-out Date (SCOD). This is the fixed annual date that all enlisted
evaluations will close out for a specific grade. It is used to determine the final TIG/TIS-
eligible pool for forced distribution allocations. Enlisted evaluations cannot be signed
before this date. (T-1) See Tables 4.7 and 4.8.
4.18.1.8. Large Unit. Any organizational structure with 11 or more TIG/TIS-eligible
Airmen or Guardians (by grade) as of the SCOD.
4.18.1.9. Small Unit. Any organizational structure with 10 or less TIG/TIS-eligible
Airmen or Guardians (by grade) as of the SCOD.
4.18.1.9.1. Under a wing-level construct, squadrons, group staffs and wing staff
agencies could be classified as small units. Under a direct reporting unit or field
operating agency level construct, squadrons, group staffs, and directorates could be
classified as small units.
4.18.1.9.2. Under a SAF/HAF/HSF/CCMD/MAJCOM/FLDCOM management level
construct, subordinate directorates with military or civilian directors that are senior
raters could be classified as small units.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 145
4.18.2. EFDP Member Roles and Responsibilities.
4.18.2.1. Panel President. A voting and scoring panel member. They must be the senior
rater assigned to the SRID or management level (assigned as the head of the management
level); for combatant commands (CCMDs) this will be the Air Force element commander
(the Air Force officer designated by the CCMD/CC as the AFELM/CC).
4.18.2.1.1. Responsibilities. Design and document procedures for their respective
EFDP and perform administrative duties in connection with the proceedings.
4.18.2.1.2. Ensures all members understand discussions regarding individual records
or award recommendations. Discussions between panel members are not to be shared
outside of the panel process. However, at the completion of the panel process and the
release of the promotion recommendations, panel members will out brief eligible
members to provide feedback and increased transparency of the panel process.
4.18.2.1.3. Ensure the consideration of all Airmen nominated to the EFDP without
prejudice or partiality in a consistent, fair, and equitable manner.
4.18.2.1.4. Administer EFDP charge to all panel members prior to board convening.
USSF panel President will administer the AF EFDP charges when presiding over an
AF EFDP.
4.18.2.2. Command Chief or Air Force Senior Enlisted Leader. Serves as an advisor to the
panel. (T-3)
4.18.2.3. Forced Distributors. A voting and scoring panel member.
4.18.2.3.1. Represent Airmen and/or Guardians nominated from their particular small
unit.
4.18.2.4. Recorders. A non-voting and non-scoring member. Recorders will not serve on
a panel for which they are being considered. They will also not assume the role or
responsibilities of a voter, scorer, or advisor for the same panel.
4.18.2.4.1. Assists the EFDP president with ensuring panel proceedings meet all
requirements.
4.18.2.4.2. Advises all panel members on the EFDP process and other administrative
matters.
4.18.3. Delegation of Roles and Responsibilities.
4.18.3.1. EFDP President. Only under extraordinary circumstances may EFDP president
responsibilities be delegated to the next senior Air Force or Space Force officer/civilian
(normally the vice commander). If applicable, the vice commander, etc., will delegate the
FD authority for the small unit to the next senior Air Force or Space Force officer/civilian.
(T-2) Example: If the MAJCOM/CV or FLDCOM/CV is appointed EFDP president by
the MAJCOM/CC or FLDCOM/CC, the next senior Air Force or Space Force
officer/civilian will be appointed FD for the MAJCOM’s or FLDCOM’s small unit FD.
4.18.3.1.1. Numbered Air Force/Center/Wing/Delta/Direct Reporting Unit/Field
Operating Agency. The vice wing commander, field operating agency or direct
reporting unit vice commander or director of staff, will serve as the “small unit
146 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
commander” only when there are eligible Airmen or Guardians assigned to those
respective staff agencies, under the direct authority of the commander (senior rater).
Senior raters will not serve in a dual-hatted capacity, where they act as both the small
unit commander and EFDP president. (T-1) Allowing the vice wing commander or
director of staff to represent eligible staff agency Airmen and/or Guardians at the EFDP
as a panel member gives the senior rater impartiality as the EFDP president.
4.18.3.1.2. If the vice commander or director of staff has been appointed as the EFDP
president, they cannot be dual-hatted and also serve as a panel member. (T-1) The next
senior Air Force or Space Force officer/civilian will serve as the FD (panel member).
4.18.3.1.3. Numbered Air Forces/centers will hold EFDPs at the numbered Air
Force/center level and not roll up to the management level. The numbered Air
Force/center commander/director as the president (unless delegated).
4.18.3.1.4. Headquarters Air Force (HAF) or Headquarters Space Force (HSF)
Staff/Major Commands (MAJCOM) or Field Commands (FLDCOM). Management
level commanders may delegate management level EFDP president responsibilities no
lower than the vice commander/deputy. (T-1) When EFDP president responsibilities
are delegated, the next senior Air Force or Space Force officer/civilian (e.g., director
of staff) will serve as the “small unit commander” when there are eligible Airmen or
Guardians assigned. Management levels or appointees, when management level EFDP
president responsibilities have been delegated, will not serve in a dual-hatted capacity.
Allowing the vice commander or appointee to represent promotion eligible Airmen or
Guardians at the EFDP gives the management level impartiality as the EFDP president.
Exception: If the vice commander is unavailable due to deployment or TDY, EFDP
president responsibilities may be further delegated to the next highest ranking Air Force
or Space Force officer or civilian equivalent (no lower than colonel).
4.18.3.1.5. Combatant Commands (CCMD). The Air Force or Space Force element
commander (AFELM/CC) will assume EFDP president responsibilities with a CCMD,
unless the CCMD’s commander is Air Force or Space Force and requests to chair the
EFDP proceedings. (T-1) If the AFELM/CC is unavailable due to a prolonged
deployment or TDY, EFDP president responsibilities may be delegated to the next
highest senior Air Force or Space Force officer. This delegation will be for the current
EFPD only, not on a permanent basis. Short absences (leave, routine TDY) do not
qualify as a reason to delegate responsibilities below the AFELM/CC.
4.18.3.1.6. For joint organizations, such as United States Military Entrance Processing
Command, which may not have an Air Force or Space Force general officer or Air
Force or Space Force colonel assigned, an exception to policy may be submitted to HQ
AFPC/DP3SP. The request must include the organizations proposed EFDP process.
4.18.3.1.7. For joint organizations, the FD can request to designate the next senior Air
Force or Space Force officer/civilian (no lower than Lt Col/civilian equivalent) to
attend the EFDP. This request must be approved by the EFDP president and
documented in writing. (T-1)
4.18.3.2. Command Chief and SELs. When circumstances warrant, the interim command
chief or SEL will serve as the advisor for the EFDP.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 147
4.18.3.3. Force Distributor (FD) Authorities. When circumstances warrant, requests can
be made to the EFDP president to designate the next senior Air Force or Space Force
officer/civilian (no lower than major or civilian equivalent) to represent them on the panel.
(T-3) If the next senior officer/civilian does not meet the grade requirement, another FD
within the senior rater’s purview (e.g., another squadron commander, group deputy) may
represent the organization. All requests must be approved by the EFDP president and
documented in writing. The FD authority will maintain all other responsibilities such as
signing enlisted evaluations and MELs.
4.18.4. Allocations and Notification.
4.18.4.1. Allocations. AF/A1 or SF/S1 determines forced distribution promotion
allocations.
4.18.4.2. Allocations are based on 5% of the total TIG/TIS promotion-eligible SrA, Spc4,
SSgt, Sgt, and TSgt population for “Promote Now” allocations, 10% of the total TIG/TIS
promotion-eligible SSgt, Sgt, and TSgt population for “Must Promote” allocations, and
15% of the total TIG/TIS promotion-eligible SrA or Spc4 population for “Must Promote”
allocations. In accordance with the aforementioned allocation rates, AFPC provides the
actual number of “Promote Now” and “Must Promote” allocations to each FD authority
via the final MEL. See Tables 4.10 and 4.11. The tables are subject to change, therefore
FDs and EFDPs will utilize the allocations provided on the final MEL.
4.18.4.2.1. Large units (11 or more TIG/TIS eligible Airmen or Guardians) will
receive their own forced distribution promotion allocations, and large unit FD
authorities will award their allocations at the unit level. (T-1) Large unit commanders
(FD authorities) cannot exceed the promotion allocations listed on the final MEL.
4.18.4.2.2. Small units (10 or less TIG/TIS eligible Airmen or Guardians) roll-up,
compete at and receive promotion recommendation allocations via the senior rater or
management level (whichever is applicable) EFDP. (T-1)
4.18.4.3. In cases where after aggregation there are not enough eligible Airmen or
Guardians from the small units to earn “Promote Now” and “Must Promote” promotion
allocations, the senior rater or management level EFDP (whichever is applicable) will
receive an outright allocation of one “Promote Now” and “Must Promote.” (T-1)
4.18.4.4. When there is only one eligible out of the senior rater or management level’s
total promotion eligible population, the senior rater or management level (whichever is
applicable) will receive an outright allocation of one “Promote Now” and one “Must
Promote.” (T-1) The senior rater or management level (whichever is applicable) will
determine if the promotion-eligible member’s record of performance warrants allocation
of either a “Promote Now” or “Must Promote” promotion recommendation and will award
the appropriate promotion recommendation.
4.18.4.5. Allocations Not Used. Management levels, senior raters, and FDs are not
required to use all allocations if they believe the performance quality and promotion
potential of Airmen or Guardians in their unit does not warrant the full share of allocations.
Additionally, redistribution or carry-over of allocations is strictly prohibited. (T-1)
148 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
4.18.4.6. Forced Distribution of Students or Patients. FDs have a separate FDID for in-
utilization permanent party students. FDs will receive a separate allocation for their
TIG/TIS promotion-eligible student or patient populations. See paragraph 4.18.6.1.
(T-1) Note: Airmen or Guardians TDY to school less than 20 weeks will fall under their
home station FDID.
4.18.5. Identifying and Notifying Organizations.
4.18.5.1. Identifying Organizations. AFPC will provide MELs identifying TIG/TIS-
eligible and non-TIG/TIS-eligible Airmen or Guardians assigned as of the accounting date.
(T-1) The MEL identifies all Airmen or Guardians with an enlisted evaluation scheduled
to close out on the applicable SCOD, regardless of an Airman’s or Guardian’s promotion
ineligibility condition(s) (e.g., on the control roster, primary AFSC/SFSC skill level too
low, undergoing Article 15 suspended reduction). See Table 4.6 for accounting dates.
4.18.5.2. Notifying Organizations. Organizations will receive an initial MEL identifying
if they are a large or small unit no later than the accounting date associated with each
grade’s SCOD. A final MEL will be forwarded following the applicable SCOD. Units
should adjudicate each MEL to ensure all unit promotion-eligible Airmen or Guardians are
accurately captured. (T-1)
4.18.6. Eligibility and Nominations.
4.18.6.1. Verifying Eligibility. Using the organization’s MEL, FD authorities verify the
eligibility of each Airman or Guardian to ensure they meets the TIG/TIS requirements for
promotion. Only verify the TIG/TIS requirements and do not consider normal individual
promotion ineligibility conditions. (T-1) This will ensure only those meeting the TIG/TIS
requirements are considered, and the FD authority receives the correct number of forced
distribution promotion allocations. Note: FD authorities with SrA, Spc4, SSgt, Sgt, or
TSgt promotion-eligible students (student squadrons) or patients (patient squadrons) will
receive forced distribution promotion allocations for their TIG/TIS promotion-eligible
student or patient populations separate from the forced distribution allocations for their
TIG/TIS promotion-eligible SrA, Spc4, SSgt, Sgt, or TSgt permanent party populations.
4.18.6.2. Nominations. Large or small unit FDs are responsible for considering all
individuals appearing on the unit’s final MEL. (T-1) FDs will consider all individuals
meeting TIG/TIS requirements.
4.18.6.2.1. Small unit promotion-eligible Airmen or Guardians are nominated by the
unit FD authority to compete for award of a forced distribution promotion allocation at
the senior rater or management level EFDP (whichever is applicable). The maximum
number of “Promote Now” and “Must Promote” allocations the EFDP may award is
based on the combined total number of TIG/TIS promotion-eligible Airmen or
Guardians from each small unit, by grade.
4.18.6.2.2. Each unit may nominate up to the maximum number of available
allocations. Example: If the total combined number of SSgt or Sgt promotion eligible
Airmen or Guardians from all small units is 28, the total promotion allocations the
EFDP may award is four (one “Promote Now” allocation and three “Must Promote”
allocations) based on a 5% “Promote Now” allocation and 10% “Must Promote”
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 149
allocation. Therefore, a small unit FD may nominate no more than four eligible SSgts
or Sgts.
4.18.6.2.3. If a small unit does not nominate an eligible Airman or Guardian, the FD
will annotate the MEL accordingly and sign.
4.18.7. EFDP Nomination Folders.
4.18.7.1. To assist in ensuring the information being considered for all promotion-eligible
Airmen or Guardians nominated to the EFDP is consistent, fair, and equitable, the
nomination folder will only include the Airman’s or Guardian’s: career brief, decorations,
and last three enlisted evaluations (this includes the enlisted evaluation being considered
for forced distribution). Commanders may also submit a push-note when the panel
proceedings are held virtually or when nominee packages will be sent to panel members in
advance of the physical panel. Push-notes will only convey the nominee’s relative standing
amongst all other Airmen or Guardians nominated by the commander.
4.18.7.2. Enlisted evaluations being considered for forced distribution must be signed by
the rater and additional rater prior to the EFDP proceedings. (T-1) Additionally, enlisted
evaluations meeting the EFDP cannot be awarded “Promote Now” or “Must Promote”
allocations or be signed by the FD prior to the panel. (T-1)
4.18.7.3. Performance assessment changes made after panel proceedings are limited to
significant quality force indicators negative or positive, that were not previously known.
(T-1)
4.18.8. EFDP Procedures.
4.18.8.1. EFDP proceedings may not commence, and promotion allocation selections may
not be made any earlier than the day following each applicable grade’s SCOD. (T-1) Any
and all notional or pre-forced distribution proceedings, ahead of the completion of each
grade’s entire reporting period (e.g., prior to 1159 hours on the applicable grade’s SCOD)
are prohibited. (T-1)
4.18.8.2. Physical or Virtual Panel. It is up to the EFDP president to determine how to
hold the EFDP based upon the nature of the organization’s structure. When the EFDP
president chooses to hold a physical panel (i.e., in person), nominee records may be
provided for review in advance of the physical proceedings. In such cases, the EFDP
recorder will ensure all records are available to all panel members to allow ample time to
review prior to the physical panel.
4.18.8.3. Small Units. Small unit TIG/TIS promotion eligible Airmen or Guardians
aggregate up to compete at the senior rater or management level EFDP.
HAF/HSF/SAF/CCMD/MAJCOM/FLDCOM FDs with 10 or less TIG/TIS eligible
Airmen or Guardians aggregate from the senior rater up to the management level EFDP.
When a commander has promotion authority over two or more units, the eligible Airmen
or Guardians are not combined. Each unit will comply with the large or small unit.
4.18.8.3.1. Small unit FDs nominate eligible Airmen or Guardians to compete at the
EFDP. Nomination folders will include the Airmen’s or Guardians’ career briefs,
decorations, and last three enlisted evaluations (this includes the enlisted evaluation
being considered for forced distribution). A push-note may also be included.
150 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
4.18.8.4. Large units. Large unit FDs are authorized to utilize the small unit EFDP process
(but not participate in small unit panels) or develop their own process. If the large unit
develops a process, the FD must disseminate the forced distribution procedures within their
organization that will be utilized no later than the accounting date for each applicable
evaluation cycle. (T-1)
4.18.8.5. Once selections are made, the FDID authority annotates and signs the applicable
MEL, identifying those selected to receive “Promote Now” and “Must Promote”
allocations. The FDID authority will then return all evaluations to the owning small unit
FD for application of the awarded allocation as well as enlisted evaluation signature by the
responsible unit commander/director/other authorized reviewer. Individual senior
raters/FDID authorities or management levels will not sign evaluations in-lieu of the FD.
4.18.8.6. If an egregious event or negative information transpires and is substantiated
during the reporting period and is discovered after the SCOD and after promotion
recommendations are allocated, the FDID authority, senior rater, or management level
(whichever is applicable), may remove or downgrade the promotion recommendation from
the ratee’s evaluation. (T-3) In such a case, the applicable forced distribution promotion
allocation will not be reallocated. (T-1)
4.18.9. Scoring.
4.18.9.1. Records are scored on a best-qualified basis. EFDP members will ensure that
Airmen or Guardians selected to receive forced distribution promotion allocations are fully
qualified to assume the next higher grade.
4.18.9.2. The senior rater or management level (whichever is applicable) may use either:
4.18.9.2.1. A “rack-n-stack” process by which each panel member rank orders all
records from highest to lowest and all rankings are combined to develop an order of
merit.
4.18.9.2.2. A panel or MLR scoring process by which EFDP records are scored in 6-
to-10 point increments.
4.18.9.3. Scoring is based on documents in each eligible’s EFDP nomination folder only.
(T-1)
4.18.9.4. Panel members will assign each eligible a score (6-to-10 point) or ranking,
reflecting their assessment of relative performance, leadership/followership, and the
potential to serve at the next higher grade.
4.18.9.5. Panel members may score nomination folders in advance on the EFDP when
authorized by the EFDP president.
4.18.9.6. If a panel member identifies a record-based matter that causes concern, they will
bring the matter to the other panel members, the panel recorder, or directly with the panel
president, so that the matter has the attention of the other panel members.
4.18.9.7. Panel members are encouraged to discuss their own knowledge and evaluation
of the professional qualifications of their respective promotion-eligible Airman or
Guardian.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 151
4.18.9.8. Panel members may not discuss or disclose the opinion of any person not a
member of the panel concerning the member.
4.18.9.9. Scoring Scale. See Table 4.1.
4.18.9.9.1. Defining "Splits." A "split" is a significant disagreement between EFDP
members about the score of a record. A “split” is considered a difference in a score of
2 or more points between any two panel members.
4.18.9.9.2. Resolving "Splits." All scoring stops and all voting EFDP members must
be present (physically or virtually) to discuss the records involved in a “split.” Only
EFDP members with split scores may change their scores in the process of resolving a
split. A “split” is resolved when there is a difference in a score of 1.5 or less points
between any two panel members.
4.18.9.9.3. Resolving “Ties.” If two or more records tie, and there are insufficient
numbers of “Promote Now”/“Must Promote” recommendations to award one to each,
the EFPD president will determine an appropriate method for breaking the tie. (T-1)
4.18.10. EFDP Report.
4.18.10.1. The panel report should contain a list of panel members, panel recorder, order
of merit (identifying total score, if/when applicable), and forced distribution promotion
recommendation status based on the available number of “Promote Now” and “Must
Promote” allocations, and cutoff score.
4.18.10.2. The report should be approved and signed by the senior rater or management
level as the panel president and by the panel recorder.
4.18.10.3. Supplemental EFDP consideration will not be given for the following reasons:
4.18.10.3.1. Incorrect data reflected on the career brief.
4.18.10.3.2. Denied EFDP nomination due to incorrect data reflected on the FDID
output products or in the career brief.
4.18.10.3.3. MELs not returned to the MPF, or individual was “overlooked” on the
listing.
4.18.10.3.4. EFDP nomination packages not completed/turned in/approved in time to
meet the board.
152 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Table 4.1. Enlisted Forced Distribution Panel Scale.
Score
Potential
10.0
Absolutely superior
9.5
Outstanding
9.0
Few could be better
8.5
Strong
8.0
Slightly above average
7.5
Average
7.0
Slightly below average
6.5
Well below average
6.0
Lowest
Table 4.2. When to Submit Enlisted Evaluations for RegAF, USSF, Active Guard Reserve,
and Stat Tour.
R
U
L
E
A
B
If
then the reason for the
evaluation is
1
RegAF ONLY: The ratee is a SrA as of the 31 March
SCOD.
Initial
2
RegAF ONLY: The ratee is an A1C or below, with 36 or
more months total active federal military service as of the 31
March SCOD. See Note 1.
Initial
3
ARC ONLY: The ratee is a SrA or above as of the SCOD of
the evaluation and has not had an evaluation.
Initial
4
ARC ONLY: The ratee is a SSgt or above and has not had
an evaluation for at least one year.
Annual
5
USSF ONLY: The ratee is a Spc3 or below, with 36 or more
months total active federal military service as of the 31
January SCOD. See Note 1.
Initial
6
USSF ONLY: The ratee is a Spc4 as of the 31 January
SCOD.
Annual
7
RegAF and USSF ONLY: Subsequent evaluations will
close-out on the SCOD (based on grade). See Note 2.
Annual
8
The ratee requires an enlisted evaluation due to placement on
a control roster. See Notes 1, 3, and 10.
Directed by Commander
(DBC)
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 153
9
An evaluation is necessary to document substandard
performance or conduct. See Notes 1 and 10.
DBC
10
The ratee is placed into record status 6, deserter. See Notes
3, 4, and 10.
DBC
11
The member needs an evaluation following a discharge action
per DAFI 36-3211. See Notes 1 and 5.
DBH
12
Authorities place the ratee in evaluating identifier 9A100 or
9A000. See Notes 6 and 7.
DBH
13
Personnel have declared the ratee missing-in-action, captured,
or detained in captive status. See Notes 1 and 7.
DBH
14
HAF directs a special evaluation. See Note 8.
DBH
15
The ratee is a CMSgt.
Annual
16
The ratee needs an evaluation in conjunction with involuntary
removal from ANG AGR or Statutory Tour.
Directed by Full-time unit
commander, TAG or
NGB/CF
17
ANG unit commander, The Adjutant General (TAG) or
NGB/CF directs a special evaluation.
Directed by Full-time unit
commander, TAG or
NGB/CF
18
A1C who enlisted under the National Call to Service
program. See Note 9.
Initial
19
Any sentence of confinement as the result of a court-martial.
See Note 1.
DBC
20
ARC ONLY: In cases where a promotion or demotion has
occurred, and a member will have more than 24 months from
the close-out date of their last evaluation and the new
established static close-out date for their new grade.
DBH
21
AGR ONLY: In cases where a promotion or demotion has
occurred, and a member will have more than 24 months from
the close-out date of their last evaluation and the new
established SCOD for their new grade. AGR personnel will
require annual evaluations. A DBH report is required in
cases where a promotion or demotion has occurred, and a
member will have more than 12 months from the close-out
date of their last evaluation and the new established SCOD
for their new grade.
DBH
154 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Notes:
1. For ARC refer to paragraph 4.7.1.2 for close-out date.
2. The close-out date is on the SCOD for the applicable grade (for example, a SSgt/Sgt will
have their evaluation close out on 31 Jan (SSgt/Sgt SCOD)). (T-1) Exception: Airmen and
Guardians selected for promotion or Airmen and Guardians who are demoted will have their
evaluation close out on the SCOD of their projected or received grade and in some cases, may
exceed a year. (T-1) Example: (RegAF and ARC only) A SSgt selected for TSgt will now
have their evaluation close out on 30 Nov. A SSgt demoted to SrA will have their evaluation
close out on 31 March. (USSF only) A TSgt selected for MSgt will now have their evaluation
close out on 31 Jul. A MSgt demoted to TSgt will have their evaluation close out on 31 Jan.
3. The close-out date of the evaluation prepared when placing a member on a control roster is
the day before the date of placement on the control roster.
4. The close-out date is the effective date the ratee is placed in record status 6, deserter.
5. When a member is undergoing an involuntary separation due to substandard performance, a
commander will complete a DBC evaluation and may only comment on the negative behavior.
(T-1) This applies to TSgts and below and the commander will close out the evaluation one
day before the written notice of the proposed action to the Airman or Guardian. (T-1). If a
member is being involuntarily separated for reasons other than substandard performance, then
a DBC evaluation is not required.
6. The evaluation's close-out date is the day before the date that authorities place the ratee in
reporting identifier 9A100 or 9A000.
7. Do not prepare enlisted evaluations for periods of missing-in-action, captured, or interned
status of less than 15 calendar days. For 15 calendar days or more, prepare an enlisted
evaluation as AFPC/DP3SP directs.
8. AFPC/DP3SP (or AFPC/DPMSP if the evaluation is necessary for promotion
consideration) directs evaluations under this rule.
9. A1Cs who enlisted under the National Call to Service program will receive their initial
enlisted evaluation upon completion of 16 months total active federal military service minus 1
day. (T-1)
10. A1C/Spc3 or below with less than 36 months total active federal military service (or date
initial entry uniformed services for ARC) do not receive an enlisted evaluation unless the
member has a minimum of 20 months TIS.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 155
Table 4.3. When to submit Enlisted Evaluations for ARC Non-AGR.
R
U
L
E
A
B
If (see Notes 1 and 8)
Then the reason for the
evaluation is
1
Close-out date will be first SrA SCOD, refer to
paragraph 4.7.1.2.
Initial
2
The ratee is a SSgt or above and has not had a
report for at least two years. See Note 3.
Biennial
3
The commander directs an evaluation.
DBC (see Note 9)
4
The commander directs an evaluation to document
substandard performance or conduct.
5
The ratee is placed into record status 6, deserter
status. See Note 6.
6
HAF, AF/RE, ARPC or NGB directs a special
evaluation. See Note 4.
DBH
7
The ratee needs an evaluation in conjunction with
discharge.
DBH
8
The ratee is declared missing-in-action, captured,
or detained in captive status See Note 5.
DBH
9
The ratee is a CMSgt. See Note 3.
Annual for AFR; Biennial for
ANG.
10
ARC ONLY: In cases where a promotion or
demotion has occurred, and a member will have
more than 24 months from the close-out date of
their last evaluation and the new established
SCOD for their new grade.
DBH
11
AGR ONLY: In cases where a promotion or
demotion has occurred, and a member will have
more than 24 months from the close-out date of
their last evaluation and the new established
SCOD for their new grade. AGR personnel will
require annual evaluations. A DBH report is
required in cases where a promotion or demotion
has occurred, and a member will have more than
12 months from the close-out date of their last
evaluation and the new established SCOD for their
new grade.
DBH
Notes:
1. For IMAs, PIRR and PIRR Category E, the unit of attachment is responsible for completing
the evaluation.
2. Refer to paragraph 4.7.1.2.
3. If the ratee did not participate during the period, the report must state this information.
(T-1).
156 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
4. HAF/REP directs enlisted evaluations under this rule for AFR; NGB/A1P for ANG.
5. Do not prepare evaluations for periods of missing-in-action, captured, or detained in
captive status of less than 15 calendar days. If the ratee remains in one of these categories for
15 calendar days or more, prepare an evaluation under this rule without regard to the number
of days of supervision. Close the evaluation on the day the ratee was placed in missing-in-
action, captured, or detained in captive status. These evaluations are as directed by HQ
AFPC/DP3SP or HQ ARPC/DPTSE.
6. The close-out date of the evaluation is the effective date the ratee is placed in record status
6, deserter.
7. Initial evaluation implementation for ANG Non-AGR SrA and above who have no
previous report; refer to paragraph 4.5.
8. Only one day is required for raters to close out an evaluation.
9. Only negative behavior and/or substandard performance is documented. Positive behavior
and/or performance will be documented on the next SCOD enlisted evaluation. (T-1)
Table 4.4. Static Close-out Date Chart for RegAF, USSF, Active Guard Reserve, and Stat
Tour.
Grade
SCOD
SrA and Below
31 Mar
Spc1 – Spc4;
SSgt/Sgt and SSgt/Sgt selects;
USSF only: TSgt and TSgt selects
31 Jan
RegAF, AGR, and Stat Tour only: TSgt and TSgt selects
30 Nov
RegAF, AGR, and Stat Tour only: MSgt and MSgts selects
30 Sep
USSF only: MSgt and MSgt selects;
SMSgt and SMSgt selects
31 Jul
CMSgt and CMSgt selects
31 May
Table 4.5. Static Close-out Date Chart for ARC Non-AGR.
Grade
SCOD
SrA and Below
31 Mar (Even years)
SSgt
31 Jan (Odd years)
TSgt
30 Nov (Even years)
MSgt
30 Sep (Odd years)
SMSgt
31 Jul (Even years)
CMSgt
31 May (Annual for AFR, Odd years for
ANG)
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 157
Table 4.6. Accounting Dates for Static Close-out Date Evaluations.
Grade (includes selectees)
Static Close-out Date
Accounting Date
SrA and below
31 Mar
3 Dec
Spc1 – Spc4;
SSgt/Sgt;
USSF only: TSgt
31 Jan
3 Oct
RegAF and ARC only: TSgt
30 Nov
3 Aug
RegAF and ARC only: MSgt
30 Sep
3 Jun
USSF only: MSgt;
SMSgt
31 Jul
3 Apr
CMSgt
31 May
3 Feb
Note: Accounting dates are approximately 120 calendar days prior to each static close-
out date and are established as the 3rd of the month for consistency.
158 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Table 4.7. Forced Distribution Allocation Table (SrA/Spc4).
Total
Eligible
Tota
l PN
Tot
al
MP
Total
Eligible
Tota
l PN
Tota
l MP
Total
Eligible
Tota
l PN
Total MP
11 - 12
1
1
178 - 182
9
27
343 - 347
17
52
13 - 17
1
2
183 - 187
9
28
348 - 349
17
53
18 - 22
1
3
188 - 189
9
29
350 - 357
18
53
23 - 27
1
4
190 - 197
10
29
358 - 362
18
54
28 - 29
1
5
198 - 202
10
30
363 - 369
18
56
30 - 37
2
5
203 - 207
10
31
370 - 377
19
56
38 - 42
2
6
208 - 209
10
32
378 - 382
19
57
43 - 47
2
7
210 - 217
11
32
383 - 387
19
58
48 - 49
2
8
218 - 222
11
33
388 - 389
19
59
50 - 57
3
8
223 - 227
11
34
390 - 397
20
59
58 - 62
3
9
228 - 229
11
35
398 - 402
20
60
63 - 67
3
10
230 - 237
12
35
403 - 407
20
61
68 - 69
3
11
238 - 242
12
36
408 - 409
20
62
70 - 77
4
11
243 - 247
12
37
410 - 417
21
62
78 - 82
4
12
248 - 249
12
38
418 - 422
21
63
83 - 87
4
13
250 - 257
13
38
423 - 427
21
64
88 - 89
4
14
258 - 262
13
39
428 - 429
21
65
90 - 97
5
14
263 - 267
13
40
430 - 437
22
65
98 – 102
5
15
268 - 269
13
41
438 - 442
22
66
103 –
107
5
16
270 - 277
14
41
443 - 447
22
67
108 -
109
5
17
278 - 282
14
42
448 - 449
22
68
110 –
117
6
17
283 - 287
14
43
450 - 457
23
68
118 –
122
6
18
288 - 289
14
44
458 - 462
23
69
123 –
127
6
19
290 - 297
15
44
463 - 467
23
70
128 –
129
6
20
298 - 302
15
45
468 - 469
23
71
130 –
137
7
20
303 - 307
15
46
470 - 477
24
71
138 –
142
7
21
308 - 309
15
47
478 - 482
24
72
143 -
147
7
22
310 - 317
16
47
483 - 487
24
73
148 -
149
7
23
318 - 322
16
48
488 - 489
24
74
150 -
157
8
23
323 - 327
16
49
490 - 497
25
74
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 159
158 -
162
8
24
328 - 329
16
50
498 - 500
25
75
163 -
167
8
25
330 - 337
17
50
168 -
177
9
26
338 - 342
17
51
Note: Table is subject to change. Utilize allocations on the final MEL(s).
160 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Table 4.8. Forced Distribution Allocation Table (SSgt/Sgt and TSgt).
Total
Eligible
Tota
l PN
Tot
al
MP
Total
Eligible
Tota
l PN
Tota
l MP
Total
Eligible
Tota
l PN
Total
MP
11 - 16
1
1
177 - 183
9
18
344 - 349
17
35
17 - 23
1
2
184 - 189
9
19
350 - 356
18
35
24 - 29
1
3
190 - 196
10
19
357 - 363
18
36
30 - 36
2
3
197 - 203
10
20
364 - 369
18
37
37 - 43
2
4
204 - 209
10
21
370 - 376
19
37
44 - 49
2
5
210 - 216
11
21
377 - 383
19
38
50 - 56
3
5
217 - 223
11
22
384 - 389
19
39
57 - 63
3
6
224 - 229
11
23
390 - 396
20
39
64 - 69
3
7
230 - 236
12
23
397 - 403
20
40
70 - 76
4
7
237 - 243
12
24
404 - 409
20
41
77 - 83
4
8
244 - 249
12
25
410 - 416
21
41
84 - 89
4
9
250 - 256
13
25
417 - 423
21
42
90 - 96
5
9
257 - 263
13
26
424 - 429
21
43
97 - 103
5
10
264 - 269
13
27
430 - 436
22
43
104 -
109
5
11
270 - 276
14
27
437 - 443
22
44
110 -
116
6
11
277 - 283
14
28
444 - 449
22
45
117 -
123
6
12
284 - 289
14
29
450 - 456
23
45
124 -
129
6
13
290 - 296
15
29
457 - 463
23
46
130 -
136
7
13
297 - 303
15
30
464 - 469
23
47
137 -
143
7
14
304 - 309
15
31
470 - 476
24
47
144 -
149
7
15
310 - 316
16
31
477 - 483
24
48
150 -
156
8
15
317 - 323
16
32
484 - 489
24
49
157 -
163
8
16
324 - 329
16
33
490 - 496
25
49
164 -
169
8
17
330 - 336
17
33
497 - 500
25
50
170 -
176
9
17
337 - 343
17
34
Note: Table is subject to change. Utilize allocations on the final MEL(s).
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 161
Table 4.9. Instructions for DAF Form 910, Enlisted Performance Report (AB/Spc1-TSgt).
SECTION I. RATEE IDENTIFICATION DATA
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
1
Name
Enter Last Name, First Name Middle Initial, and any
suffix (e.g., JR., SR., III). If there is no middle
initial, the use of “NMI” is optional. Name will be in
all upper case (see example).
DOE, JANE L.
2
SSN
Enter full social security number.
123-45-6789
3
Grade
Enter appropriate grade.
AB, Amn, A1C,
SrA,
SSgt Select,
SSgt, TSgt
Select, TSgt,
Specialist 1 – 4,
Sgt Select, Sgt
4
DAFSC/DSFSC
Enter DAFSC/DSFSC held as of the “THRU” date
of the evaluation, including prefix and suffix, if
applicable, or in the event of PCS or PCA, or if a
member departs from a 365-day extended
deployment, use the information as of the accounting
date. 365-day extended deployments will use the
TDY DAFSC/DSFSC.
3F151
162 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
5
Organization,
Command and
Location
Enter information as of the SCOD or in the event of
PCS or PCA, or if a member departs from a 365-day
extended deployment, use the information as of the
accounting date. Nomenclature does not necessarily
duplicate what is on the enlisted evaluation notice.
The goal is an accurate description of what unit,
location and command the ratee belongs.
Command will be listed inside parentheses. 365-day
extended deployments will use the home station unit,
“with duty at …”
AFR only: For IMAs, PIRR, and PIRR Category E,
information will be that of unit of attachment.
For Airmen who support Space Force, the command
will be annotated as “Air Force Material Command
(AFMC)”.
(use format in example)
366th Force
Support
Squadron (ACC),
Mountain Home
AFB ID
902nd Security
Forces Squadron
(AETC), Joint
Base San
Antonio-
Randolph TX,
with duty at 447
ESFS
(USAFCENT),
Baghdad
International
Airport,
Baghdad, Iraq
HQ Air Combat
Command, Joint
Base Langley-
Eustis VA
6
PAS Code
Enter PAS code for ratee’s unit of assignment as of
the SCOD or in the event of PCS or PCA,
information as of the accounting date. For those
assigned to 365-day extended deployment billet, use
the home station PAS code.
AFR only: For IMAs, PIRR and PIRR Category E,
use unit of attachment’s PAS code.
TE1CFYRZ
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 163
7
FDID
Enter Force Distributor ID (FDID) for ratee’s unit of
assignment (PAS code) as of the SCOD or in the
event of PCS or PCA, information as of the
accounting date. For those assigned to a 365-day
extended deployment, use the home station FDID.
AFR only: For IMAs, PIRR and PIRR Category E,
SRID is that of unit of attachment.
ANG: The ANG does not use forced distribution;
this field should reflect the member’s PAS Code if
ANG.
DP11MFN99
8
Period of Report
FROM DATE: See paragraph 4.6
01 Dec 2023
THRU DATE: This is the SCOD for the
appropriate grade, except for 20-month Initial EPRs
not closing on the SrA SCOD. See paragraph 4.7
for variations.
30 Nov 2024
9
Number of Days
Non-Rated
Enter the number of days non-rated from the
authorized documentation, if applicable. See
paragraph 4.8 for guidance on what circumstances
qualify for non-rated.
120
10
Number of Days
Supervision
Enter the number of days of supervision. See
paragraph 4.8
365 (deduct only
the authorized
number of days
“non-rated”)
11
Reason for Report
Select the reason for evaluation.
Annual
164 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
SECTION II. JOB DESCRIPTION
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
12
Duty Title
Enter the approved duty title from the MilPDS as of
the SCOD or in the event of PCS or PCA,
information as of the accounting date.
If the duty title is abbreviated and entries are not
clear text, spell them out. Consult with your
CSS/MPF for any corrective actions. Ensure the
duty title is commensurate with the ratee’s grade,
AFSC/SFSC, and responsibility. Refer to Enlisted
Force Structure for guidance pertaining to duty
titles.
(use format in example)
For personnel on a 365-day extended deployment,
use the deployed duty title.
NCOIC, Force
Management
13
Key Duties, Tasks
and Responsibilities
Comments in bullet format are mandatory. Limit
text to four lines. Enter information about the
position the ratee held in the unit as of the SCOD or
in the event of a PCS or PCA, information as of the
accounting date and the nature or level of job
responsibilities. The rater develops the information
for this section.
This description must reflect the uniqueness of each
ratee's job. Be specific--include level of
responsibility, number of people supervised, dollar
value of resources accountable for, projects
managed, etc. Make it clear; use plain English.
Avoid jargon, acronyms, and topical references--
they obscure rather than clarify meaning. Previous
jobs held during the reporting period may be
mentioned only if it impacts the evaluation.
- Authors
guidance on
performance
evaluations
- Prepares lesson
plans for ALS
curriculum
- Supervises 2
Airmen …
SECTION III. PERFORMANCE IN PRIMARY DUTIES/TRAINING
REQUIREMENTS
SECTION IV. FOLLOWERSHIP/LEADERSHIP
SECTION V. WHOLE AIRMAN/GUARDIAN CONCEPT. Note: If an Airman or
Guardian is marked “Met some but not all expectations” in Section III or Section IV
then this block will not be completed.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 165
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
14
Assessment Areas
Listed on DAF
Form 910
Select the block that accurately describes the ratee’s
performance during the assessment period.
Not Rated: See paragraph 4.8.
Organizational Climate: See paragraph 1.8.9.
Met some but not all expectations: Performs
below established DAF standards and expectations,
requires improvement. Routine or significant
unacceptable performance, actions that are
incompatible with, and personnel who have failed to
adhere to established standards and expectations.
Performs routinely or significantly at an
unacceptable level. Routinely means a repeated
inability to meet standards that would render the
aggregated performance assessment over the entire
reporting period as below DAF standards or
expectations. Significantly means a single instance
where failure to meet standards is either egregious in
nature or so far short of a standard that it impacts the
overall aggregated performance assessment.
Met all expectations: Meets established DAF
standards and expectations.
Exceeded some, but not all expectations:
Performs beyond most established DAF standards
and expectations.
Exceed most, if not all expectations: Performs at
a higher level than peers, far exceeds DAF standards
and expectations, unique performer.
The Rater (and
subsequent
evaluators) will
not consider, nor
comment on, the
member's
performance
during an
approved non-
rated period (in
accordance with
paragraph 4.8).
(T-1)
166 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
15
Comments
Comments are mandatory (minimum of one line),
must be in bullet format, must support the
assessment, and in Section III comments are limited
to 6 lines and Section IV and V comments are
limited to 2 lines. May use “THIS LINE
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK” as a mandatory
line.
SECTION VI. OVERALL PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
16
Rater’s Overall
Performance
Assessment
Select the block that accurately describes the ratee’s
performance during the assessment period.
See item 14 of this table for definitions of
performance assessment markings.
Not Rated: See paragraph 4.8.
Organizational Climate: See paragraph 1.8.9
The Rater (and
subsequent
evaluators) will
not consider, nor
comment on, the
member's
performance
during an
approved non-
rated period (in
accordance with
paragraph 4.8).
(T-1)
SECTION VII. RATER INFORMATION
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 167
17
Rater’s Name,
Grade, Branch of
Service,
Organization,
Command, and
Location
Enter rater’s information as of the SCOD. However,
if the airman or guardian has a Permanent Change of
Station (PCS) or Permanent Change of Assignment
(PCA), or if a member departs from a 365-day
extended deployment on or after the accounting date,
use the rater as of the established accounting date.
(use format in example)
JOHN J. DOE,
SMSgt, USAF
39th Force
Support
Squadron (AFR)
Incirlik AB TU
For ANG:
MARISSA
LLAMAS,
SMSgt, FLANG
125th Medical
Group (ACC)
Jacksonville
ANGB FL
18
Duty Title
Enter rater’s duty title as of the SCOD. However, if
the airman has a Permanent Change of Station (PCS)
or Permanent Change of Assignment (PCA) on or
after the accounting date, use the information as of
the established accounting date.
(use format in example)
Operations Flight
Chief
19
SSN
Enter the last four digits of the social security
number.
6789
20
Date & Signature
The forms have digital signature and auto-date
capability. In the rare instance where digital
signatures cannot be used, sign in reproducible blue
or black ink and handwrite, stamp or type the date.
Do not sign blank forms or sign before the SCOD
(only on or after).
Digital or wet
signatures. A
combination of
both is
authorized.
SECTION VIII. ADDITIONAL RATER’S COMMENTS
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
21
Concur/non-concur
Place an “X” in only one of the blocks.
X
168 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
22
Comments
Must be in bullet format. A comment is mandatory
when the report is a referral; otherwise, comments
are optional. If comments are not used, insert,
“THIS LINE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.”
Limited to two lines. If comments are not
authorized state: “RATER IS ALSO THE
ADDITIONAL RATER”. (T-1)
Organizational Climate: See paragraph 1.8.9.
- Restructured
Enlisted Force
Policy…..
23
Additional Rater’s
Name, Grade,
Branch of Service,
Organization,
Command, and
Location
Additional raters assigned on or prior to SCOD,
enter information as of the SCOD; additional raters
assigned after the SCOD, enter the information as of
the date signed. However, if the airman or guardian
has a Permanent Change of Station (PCS) or
Permanent Change of Assignment (PCA) on or after
the accounting date, use the additional rater as of the
established accounting date.
Multiple general officers serving as evaluators are
prohibited, see paragraph 1.7.1.7 for exceptions.
(T-1).
(use format in example)
JOHN J. DOE,
Capt, USAF 36th
Dental
Squadron
(PACAF)
Andersen ABW
GU
For ANG:
LUPITA I.
BENITEZ, Maj,
FLANG
125th Medical
Group (ACC)
Jacksonville
ANGB FL
24
Duty Title
Enter Additional Rater’s Duty Title as of the SCOD.
However, if the Airman or Guardian has a
Permanent Change of Station (PCS) or Permanent
Change of Assignment (PCA) on or after the
accounting date, use the information as of the
established accounting date.
(refer to item 23).
(use format in example)
Operations Flight
Commander
25
SSN
Enter the last four digits of the social security
number.
9876
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 169
26
Date & Signature
The forms have digital signature and auto-date
capability. In the rare instance where digital
signatures cannot be used, sign in reproducible blue
or black ink and handwrite, stamp or type the date.
Do not sign blank forms or sign before the SCOD
(only on or after).
Digital or wet
signatures. A
combination of
both is
authorized.
SECTION IX. UNIT COMMANDER/MILITARY OR CIVILIAN
DIRECTOR/OTHER AUTHORIZED REVIEWER’S COMMENTS
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
27
Concur/non-concur
Place an “X” in only one of the blocks.
X
28
Comments
Must be in bullet format. A comment is mandatory
when the report is a referral; otherwise, comments
are optional. If comments are not used, insert,
“THIS LINE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.”
Limited to one line.
Organizational Climate: See paragraph 1.8.9
- Restructured
Enlisted Force
Policy…
29
Future Roles
(Optional)
Recommend up to three roles/assignments that best
serve the Department of the Air Force and continue
the member’s development. Future roles may not
serve as veiled promotion statements, i.e., you may
ONLY recommend personnel for a future role that
they are eligible for based on current or projected
grade and/or the grade that they are TIG/TIS eligible
for promotion to, as of the evaluation SCOD.
Example: A SSgt or Sgt may not be recommended
for Section Superintendent duties as that constitutes
a veiled promotion statement to MSgt.
1. NCOIC,
Force
Management
2. NCOIC,
Operations
30
Promotion
Eligibility
As of the SCOD of the evaluation, indicate whether
the ratee is TIG/TIS promotion eligible. See
paragraph 4.10
Yes or No (drop
down block)
31
This is a Referral
Report
Indicate whether the report contains negative
comments or derogatory information.
Yes or No (drop
down block)
170 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
32
Quality Force
Review
Indicates the ratee’s personnel record has been
reviewed for quality force indicators during the
reporting period.
Yes or No (drop
down block)
33
Promotion
Recommendation
This section is to be completed
only when the member is eligible for a promotion
recommendation.
Not Ready Now (NRN): Not considered ready for
promotion at this time based on the need for
additional grooming in the current grade, or where
personnel may require specific attention regarding
performance of established DAF standards and
expectations. NRN evaluations do not necessarily
constitute a referral, provided the report contains no
negative comments, or derogatory information.
Promote (P): Recommended for promotion based
on performance at or above established DAF
standards and expectations. Performs with the
majority of personnel and at a level commensurate
with peers.
Must Promote (MP): Recommended for
accelerated promotion based on stellar performance
well above established DAF standards and
expectations.
Designated for outstanding performers who perform
at a level higher than their peers. RegAF personnel
receiving a “MP” receive a distinct promotion
advantage over their peers.
Promote Now (PN): Recommended for immediate
promotion based on exemplary performance that far
exceeds established DAF standards and
expectations. Reserved for elite performers who
perform well above other personnel in their peer
group. RegAF and USSF personnel receiving a
“PN” receive a significant promotion advantage over
their peers.
X
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 171
34
Unit Commander
Name, Grade,
Branch of Service,
Organization,
Command, and
Location
Enter Unit Commander’s information as of the
close-out date. However, if the Airman or Guardian
has a Permanent Change of Station (PCS) or
Permanent Change of Assignment (PCA) on or after
the accounting date, use the unit commander as of
the established accounting date.
(use format in example)
JOHN J. DOE,
Lt Col, USAF
9th Force
Support
Squadron (ACC)
Beale AFB CA
35
Duty Title
Enter Duty Title as of the SCOD. However, if the
airman has a Permanent Change of Station (PCS) or
Permanent Change of Assignment (PCA) on or after
the accounting date, use the information as of the
established accounting date.
(use format in example)
Commander
36
SSN
Enter the last four digits of the social security
number.
1111
37
Date & Signature
The forms have digital signature and auto-date
capability. In the rare instance where digital
signatures cannot be used, sign in reproducible blue
or black ink and handwrite, stamp or type the date.
Do not sign blank forms or sign before the SCOD
(only on or after).
Digital or wet
signatures. A
combination of
both is
authorized.
SECTION X. FUNCTIONAL EXAMINER/AIR FORCE ADVISOR
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
38
Functional
Examiner, AF
and/or SF Advisor
When applicable, place an “X” in the appropriate
box.
X
39
Name, Grade,
Branch of Service,
Organization,
Command &
Location
Enter Functional Examiner or Air Force/Space Force
Advisor signature block as of the SCOD.
(use format in example)
JANE R. DOE,
Lt Gen, USAF
18th Air Force
(AMC)
Scott AFB IL
40
Duty Title
Enter Advisor/Examiner’s duty title as of the SCOD.
(use format in example)
Command
Financial
Manager
172 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
41
SSN
Enter the last four digits of the social security
number.
0001
42
Date & Signature
The forms have digital signature and auto-date
capability. In the rare instance where digital
signatures cannot be used, sign in reproducible blue
or black ink and handwrite, stamp or type the date.
Do not sign blank forms or sign before the SCOD
(only on or after).
Digital or wet
signatures. A
combination of
both is
authorized.
SECTION XI. REMARKS
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
43
Acronyms
Use this section to spell out uncommon acronyms in
alphabetical order. Separate acronyms with a
semicolon.
AFPC;
Casualty Report
(CASREP)
SECTION XII. RATEE’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
44
Ratee’s
Acknowledgement
and Date &
Signature
The ratee must acknowledge receipt prior to the
evaluation becoming a matter of record by signing in
this block. Signing the evaluation does not imply
concurrence, but acknowledgement. If ratee non-
concurs with the evaluation, they may submit an
appeal in accordance with Chapter 10. Non-digital:
Handwrite, date stamp or type the date. Sign after
the SCOD. Select appropriate choice from drop
down menu: Blank – member concurs and signs
evaluation.
“Not available to sign” – use when member is
incapacitated or unavailable to sign; rater or any
higher evaluator in the rating chain signs. “Ratee
refused to sign” – use when member refuses to sign
the form; rater or any higher evaluator in the
assessment chain signs.
Digital or wet
signatures. A
combination of
both is
authorized.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 173
Table 4.10. Instructions for AF Form 911, Enlisted Performance Report (MSgt-SMSgt).
Note: Air Force terminology on the AFI Form 911 applies to the
equivalent Space Force terminology (e.g., Airman applies to
Guardian, Duty Air Force Specialty Code applies to Duty Space
Force Specialty Code).
SECTION I. RATEE IDENTIFICATION DATA
I
T
E M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
1
Name
Enter Last Name, First Name Middle Initial, and
any suffix (e.g., JR., SR., III). If there is no
middle initial, the use of “NMI” is optional.
Name will be in all upper case.
DOE, JOHN D.
2
SSN
Enter full social security number.
123-45-6789
3
Grade
Enter appropriate grade.
MSgt Select, MSgt,
SMSgt Select,
SMSgt
4
DAFSC/DSFSC
Enter DAFSC/DSFSC held as of the “THRU”
date of the evaluation, including prefix and
suffix, if applicable or in the event of PCS or
PCA, or if a member departs from a 365-day
extended deployment, use the information as of
the accounting date. 365-day extended
deployments will use the TDY DAFSC/DSFSC.
3F071
174 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
5
Organization,
Command,
Location, and
Component
Enter information as of the SCOD or in the event
of PCS or PCA, or if a member departs from a
365-day extended deployment, use the
information as of the accounting date.
Nomenclature does not necessarily duplicate
what is on the notice. The goal is an accurate
description of what unit, location and command
the ratee belongs. Command will be listed inside
parentheses. 365-day extended deployments will
use the home station unit, “with duty at …”
AFR only: For IMAs, PIRR and PIRR Category
E, information will be that of unit of attachment.
For Airmen who support Space Force, the
command will be annotated as “Air Force
Material Command (AFMC)”.
(use format in example)
366th Force Support
Squadron (ACC),
Mountain Home
AFB ID
902nd Security
Forces Squadron
(AETC), Joint Base
San Antonio-
Randolph TX, with
duty at 447 ESFS
(USAFCENT),
Baghdad
International Airport,
Baghdad, Iraq
HQ Air Combat
Command, Joint
Base Langley-Eustis
VA
6
PAS Code
Enter PAS code for ratee’s unit of assignment as
of the SCOD or in the event of PCS or PCA,
information as of the accounting date. For those
assigned to 365-day extended deployment billet,
use the home station PAS code.
AFR only: For IMAs, PIRR and PIRR Category
E, use unit of attachment’s PAS code.
TE1CFYRZ
7
SRID
Enter SRID for ratee’s unit of assignment (PAS
code) as of SCOD or in the event of PCS or
PCA, information as of the accounting date. For
those assigned to a 365-day extended
deployment, use the home station SRID.
AFR only: For IMAs, PIRR, and PIRR
Category E, SRID is that of unit of attachment.
0D107
8
Period of Report
FROM date: See paragraph 4.6
1 Aug 2015
THRU date: This is the SCOD for the
appropriate grade. See paragraph 4.7 for
variations.
31 Jul 2016
9
Number of Days
Non-Rated
Enter the number of days non-rated. See
paragraph 4.8
96
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 175
10
Number of Days
Supervision
Enter the number of days of supervision. See
paragraph 4.8
365 (deduct only the
authorized number
of days “non-rated”
in accordance with
paragraph 4.8)
11
Reason for Report
Select the reason for evaluation.
Annual
SECTION II. JOB DESCRIPTION
I
T
E M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
12
Duty Title
Enter the approved duty title from the PDS as of
the SCOD or in the event of PCS or PCA,
information as of the accounting date.
If the duty title is abbreviated and entries are not
clear text, spell them out. Consult with your
CSS/MPF for any corrective actions. Ensure the
duty title is commensurate with the ratee’s grade,
AFSC/SFSC, and responsibility. Refer to The
Enlisted Force Structure for guidance pertaining
to duty titles.
For personnel on a 365-day extended
deployment, use the deployed duty title.
(use format in example)
NCOIC, Safety
176 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
13
Key Duties, Tasks
and Responsibilities
Comments in bullet format are mandatory. Limit
text to four lines. Enter information about the
position the ratee held in the unit as of the SCOD
or in the event of PCS or PCA to a new PAS
code, information as of the accounting date and
the nature or level of job responsibilities. The
rater develops the information for this section.
This description must reflect the uniqueness of
each ratee's job. Be specific--include level of
responsibility, number of people supervised,
dollar value of resources accountable for,
projects managed, etc. Make it clear; use plain
English.
Avoid jargon, acronyms, and topical references
as they obscure rather than clarify meaning.
Previous jobs held during the reporting period
may be mentioned only if it impacts the
evaluation.
- Authors guidance
on performance
evaluations …
- Prepares lesson
plans for ALS
curriculum
- Supervises 2
Airmen …
SECTION III. PERFORMANCE IN LEADERSHIP/PRIMARY
DUTIES/FOLLOWERSHIP/TRAINING REQUIREMENTS
SECTION IV. WHOLE AIRMAN/GUARDIAN CONCEPT. Note: If an Airman or
Guardian is marked
“Met some but not all expectations” in Section III then this block will not be
completed.
I
T
E M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 177
14
Assessment Areas
Listed on AF Form
911
Select the block that accurately describes the
ratee’s performance during the assessment
period.
Not Rated: See paragraph 4.8.
Organizational Climate: See paragraph 1.8.9.
Met some but not all expectations:
Performs below established DAF standards and
expectations, requires improvement.
Routine or significant unacceptable performance,
actions that are incompatible with, and personnel
who have failed to adhere to established
standards and expectations.
Performs routinely or significantly at an
unacceptable level. Routinely means a repeated
inability to meet standards that would render the
aggregated performance assessment over the
entire reporting period as below DAF standards
or expectations. Significantly means a single
instance where failure to meet standards is either
egregious in nature or so far short of a standard
that it impacts the overall aggregated
performance assessment.
Met all expectations: Meets established DAF
standards and expectations.
Exceeded some, but not all expectations:
Performs beyond most established DAF
standards and expectations.
Exceed most, if not all expectations: Performs
at a higher level than peers, far exceeds DAF
standards and expectations, unique performer.
The rater (and
subsequent
evaluators) will not
consider, nor
comment on, the
member’s
performance during
an approved non-
rated period (in
accordance with
paragraph 4.8)
(T-1)
178 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
15
Comments
Comments are mandatory (minimum of one
line), must be in bullet format, must support the
assessment, and in Section III comments are
limited to 8 lines and Section IV comments are
limited to 2 lines. May use “THIS LINE
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK” as a
mandatory line.
Organizational Climate: See paragraph 1.8.9
SECTION V. OVERALL PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT
I
T
E M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
16
Rater’s Overall
Performance
Assessment
Select the block that accurately describes the
ratee’s performance during the assessment
period.
The rater (and subsequent evaluators) will not
consider, nor comment on, the Airman's or
Guardian’s performance during an approved
non-rated period (in accordance with paragraph
4.8) (T-1)
Organizational Climate: See paragraph 1.8.9
See definitions of
performance
assessments in item
14 of this table.
SECTION VI. RATER INFORMATION
I
T
E M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 179
17
Rater’s Name,
Grade, Branch of
Service,
Organization,
Command, and
Location
Enter rater’s information as of the close-out date.
However, if the airman has a Permanent Change
of Station (PCS) or Permanent Change of
Assignment (PCA), or if a member departs from
a 365-day extended deployment on or after the
accounting date, use the rater as of the
established accounting date.
(use format in example)
JOHN J. DOE,
SMSgt, USAF
72d Force Support
Squadron (AFMC)
Tinker AFB OK
For ANG:
BRIGID N.
BENTLEY, CMSgt,
MAANG 102d
Security Forces
Squadron (ACC)
Otis ANGB MA
18
Duty Title
Enter rater’s duty title as of the SCOD.
However, if the airman or guardian has a
Permanent Change of Station (PCS) or
Permanent Change of Assignment (PCA) on or
after the accounting date, use the information as
of the established accounting date.
(use format in example)
Operations Flight
Chief
19
SSN
Enter the last four digits of the social security
number.
6789
20
Date & Signature
The forms have digital signature and auto-date
capability. In the rare instance where digital
signatures cannot be used, sign in reproducible
blue or black ink and handwrite, stamp or type
the date. Do not sign blank forms or sign before
the SCOD (only on or after). Rater assessment
and feedback block will be locked, and
additional rater signature capability unlocked
with rater digital signature.
Digital or wet
signatures. A
combination of both
is authorized.
SECTION VII. ADDITIONAL RATER’S COMMENTS
I
T
E M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
21
Concur/non- concur
Place an “X” in only one of the blocks
X
180 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
22
Comments
Must be in bullet format. A comment is
mandatory when the report is a referral;
otherwise, they are optional. If comments are
not used insert “THIS LINE INTENTIONALLY
LEFT BLANK”.
Limited to two lines. If comments are not
authorized state: “RATER IS ALSO THE
ADDITIONAL RATER”.
Organizational Climate: See paragraph 1.8.9
- Restructured
Enlisted Force
Policy
23
Additional Rater’s
Name, Grade,
Branch of Service,
Organization,
Command, and
Location
Additional raters assigned on or prior to SCOD,
enter information as of the SCOD; additional
raters assigned after the SCOD, enter the
information as of the date signed. However, if
the airman or guardian has a Permanent Change
of Station (PCS) or Permanent Change of
Assignment (PCA) on or after the accounting
date, use the additional rater as of the established
accounting date.
Multiple general officers serving as evaluators
are prohibited, see paragraph
1.7.1.7 for exceptions. (T-1).
(use format in example)
JOHN J. DOE, Capt,
USAF
72d Force Support
Squadron (AFMC)
Tinker AFB OK
For ANG:
LATRISHA M.
LEE, Lt Col,
MAANG 102d
Intelligence Wing
(ACC) Otis ANGB
MA
24
Duty Title
Enter additional rater’s duty title. However, if
the airman or guardian has a Permanent Change
of Station (PCS) or Permanent Change of
Assignment (PCA) on or after the accounting
date, use the rater as of the established
accounting date.
(refer to item 23)
(use format in example)
Operations Flight
Commander
25
SSN
Enter the last four digits of the social security
number.
9876
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 181
26
Date & Signature
The forms have digital signature and auto-date
capability. In the rare instance where digital
signatures cannot be used, sign in reproducible
blue or black ink and handwrite, stamp or type
the date. Do not sign blank forms or sign before
the SCOD (only on or after). Rater assessment
and feedback block will be locked, and
additional rater signature capability unlocked
with rater digital signature.
Digital or wet
signatures. A
combination of both
is authorized.
SECTION VIII. UNIT COMMANDER/MILITARY OR
CIVILIAN DIRECTOR/OTHER AUTHORIZED REVIEWER’S COMMENTS
I
T
E M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
27
Concur/non-concur
Place an “X” in only one of the blocks
X
28
Comments
Must be in bullet format. A comment is
mandatory when the report is a referral;
otherwise, they are optional. If comments are
not used insert “THIS LINE INTENTIONALLY
LEFT BLANK”.
Limited to one line.
Organizational Climate: See paragraph 1.8.9
- Restructured
Enlisted Force
Policy….
29
Future Roles
(Optional)
Recommend up to three roles that best serve the
Air Force/Space Force and continues the
Airman's or Guardian’s development. Future
roles may not serve as veiled promotion
statements, i.e., you may only recommend an
Airman or Guardian for a future role that they
are eligible for based on current or projected
grade, as of the evaluation SCOD. However, for
TIG/TIS eligible you may recommend a future
role for the next grade.
Example: A MSgt may not be recommended
for command chief duties as that constitutes a
veiled promotion statement to CMSgt.
1. Section Chief
2. Flight Chief
3. First Sergeant
182 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
30
Education
As of the SCOD of the evaluation, indicate
whether the ratee has had a CCAF completed
and conferred (Yes or No) in any
discipline/specialty. Also indicate whether the
ratee completed professional military education
(SNCOA or equivalent sister-service academy,
via in-residence or correspondence).
Yes or No (drop
down block)
31
Promotion
Eligibility
As of the SCOD of the evaluation, indicate
whether the ratee is TIG/TIS promotion eligible.
See paragraph 4.11
Yes or No (drop
down block)
32
This Is A Referral
Report
Indicate whether the report contains negative
comments or derogatory information.
Yes or No (drop
down block)
33
Quality Force
Review
Indicates the ratee’s personnel record has been
reviewed for quality force indicators during the
reporting period.
Yes or No (drop
down block)
34
Unit Commander /
Military or Civilian
Director / Other
Authorized
Reviewer Name,
Grade, Branch of
Service,
Organization,
Command, and
Location.
Enter rater’s information as of the close-out date.
However, if the airman has a Permanent Change
of Station (PCS) or Permanent Change of
Assignment (PCA) on or after the accounting
date, use the unit commander as of the
established accounting date.
(use format in example)
JOHN J. DOE, Lt
Col, USAF
56th Force Support
Squadron (ACC)
Luke AFB AZ
35
Duty Title
Enter duty title as of the SCOD. However, if the
airman or guardian has a Permanent Change of
Station (PCS) or Permanent Change of
Assignment (PCA) on or after the accounting
date, use the rater as of the established
accounting date.
(use format in example)
Commander
36
SSN
Enter the last four digits of the social security
number.
0001
37
Date & Signature
The forms have digital signature and auto-date
capability. In the rare instance where digital
signatures cannot be used, sign in reproducible
blue or black ink and handwrite, stamp or type
the date. Do not sign blank forms or sign before
the SCOD (only on or after).
Digital or wet
signatures. A
combination of both
is authorized.
SECTION IX. FINAL EVALUATOR’S COMMENTS
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 183
I
T
E M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
38
Concur/non- concur
Place an “X” in only one of the blocks.
X
39
Final Evaluator’s
Comments
Completed by authorized final evaluator as of the
close-out date. Limit to one line. If comments
are not provided state:
“THIS LINE INTENTIONALLY LEFT
BLANK”.
- My #1 of 20
promotion eligible
MSgts
- Outstanding
leader and mentor…
40
Final Evaluator
Position
This is the final evaluator’s position (see
paragraph 4.12)
Senior Rater
41
Senior Rater
Stratification
This is the senior rater stratification and is
limited to the senior rater’s top 10% TIG/TIS
promotion eligible MSgts and the top 20% of
TIG/TIS promotion eligible SMSgt as of the
SCOD. See paragraph 4.11.2
Top 10% of MSgts;
Top 20% of SMSgts
42
Final Evaluator’s
Name, Grade,
Branch of Service,
Organization,
Command
& Location
Enter Final Evaluator’s information as of the
close-out date. However, if the airman has a
Permanent Change of Station (PCS) or
Permanent Change of Assignment (PCA) on or
after the accountability date, use the rater as of
the established accounting date.
(use format in example)
JANE M. DOE, Col,
USAF
56th Fighter Wing
(ACC) Luke AFB
AZ
43
Duty Title
Enter duty title as of the SCOD. However, if the
airman has a Permanent Change of Station (PCS)
or Permanent Change of Assignment (PCA) on
or after the accounting date, use the information
as of the established accounting date.
(use format in example)
Wing Commander
44
SSN
Enter the last four digits of the social security
number.
1111
184 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
45
Date & Signature
The forms have digital signature and auto-date
capability. In the rare instance where digital
signatures cannot be used, sign in reproducible
blue or black ink and handwrite, stamp or type
the date. Do not sign blank forms or sign before
the SCOD (only on or after). Rater assessment
and feedback block will be locked, and
additional rater signature capability unlocked
with rater digital signature.
Digital or wet
signatures. A
combination of both
is authorized.
SECTION X. FUNCTIONAL EXAMINER/AIR FORCE OR SPACE FORCE
ADVISOR
I
T
E M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
46
Functional
Examiner or AF/SF
Advisor
When applicable, place an “X” in the appropriate
box.
X
47
Name, Grade,
Branch of Service,
Organization,
Command &
Location
Enter functional examiner or Air Force/Space
Force advisor signature block as of the SCOD.
(use format in example)
JOHN R. DOE
Lt Col, USAF
16th Air Force
(USAFE) Ramstein
AB GE
48
Duty Title
Enter advisor/examiner’s duty title as of the
SCOD.
(use format in example)
Command Financial
Manager
49
SSN
Enter the last four digits of the social security
number.
1111
50
Date & Signature
The forms have digital signature and auto-date
capability. In the rare instance where digital
signatures cannot be used, sign in reproducible
blue or black ink and handwrite, stamp or type
the date. Do not sign blank forms or sign before
the SCOD (only on or after).
Digital or wet
signatures. A
combination of both
is authorized.
SECTION XI. REMARKS
I
T
E M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 185
51
Acronyms
Use this section to spell out uncommon
acronyms alphabetically. Separate acronyms
with a semicolon.
AFPC; Casualty
Report (CASREP)
SECTION XII. RATEE’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I
T
E M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
52
Ratee’s
Acknowledgement
and Date &
Signature
The ratee must acknowledge receipt prior to the
evaluation becoming a matter of record by
signing this block. Signing does not imply
concurrence, but acknowledgement. If ratee
non-concurs with the evaluation, they may
submit an appeal in accordance with Chapter
10. Non-digital: Sign in reproducible blue or
black ink and handwrite, stamp or type the date.
Do not sign before the SCOD (only on or after).
Select appropriate choice from drop down menu:
Blank – ratee concurs and digitally signs
evaluation.
“Not Available to Sign” – use when the ratee is
incapacitated or unavailable to sign; rater or any
higher evaluator in the rating chain (digitally)
signs.
“Ratee Refused to Sign” – use when member
refuses to sign the form; rater or any higher
evaluator in the rating chain (digitally) signs.
186 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Table 4.11. Time-in-Grade (TIG) Senior Rater Eligibility Chart.
MSGT CHART
If ratee is:
and EPR c/o date is:
and date of rank is:
TIG Eligible
MSgt
1 Jan 16 - 30 Sep 16
prior to or equal to 1 Jul 15
MSgt
1 Jan 16 - 30 Sep 16
after 1 Jul 15
NO
MSgt
1 Oct 16 - 31 Dec 16
prior to or equal to 1 Jul 16
YES
MSgt
1 Oct 16 - 31 Dec 16
after 1 Jul 16
NO
MSgt
1 Jan 17 - 30 Sep 17
prior to or equal to 1 Jul 16
YES
MSgt
1 Jan 17 - 30 Sep 17
after 1 Jul 16
NO
MSgt
1 Oct 17 - 31 Dec 17
prior to or equal to 1 Jul 17
YES
MSgt
1 Oct 17 - 31 Dec 17
after 1 Jul 17
NO
MSgt
1 Jan 18 - 30 Sep 18
prior to or equal to 1 Jul 17
YES
MSgt
1 Jan 18 - 30 Sep 18
after 1 Jul 17
NO
MSgt
1 Oct 18 - 31 Dec 18
prior to or equal to 1 Jul 18
YES
MSgt
1 Oct 18 - 31 Dec 18
after 1 Jul 18
NO
MSgt
1 Jan 19 - 30 Sep 19
prior to or equal to 1 Jul 18
YES
MSgt
1 Jan 19 - 30 Sep 19
after 1 Jul 18
NO
MSgt
1 Oct 19 - 31 Dec 19
prior to or equal to 1 Jul 19
YES
MSgt
1 Oct 19 - 31 Dec 19
after 1 Jul 19
NO
MSgt
1 Jan 20 - 30 Sep 20
prior to or equal to 1 Jul 19
YES
MSgt
1 Jan 20 - 30 Sep 20
after 1 Jul 19
NO
MSgt
1 Oct 20 - 31 Dec 20
prior to or equal to 1 Jul 20
YES
MSgt
1 Oct 20 - 31 Dec 20
after 1 Jul 20
NO
MSgt
1 Jan 21 - 30 Sep 21
prior to or equal to 1 Jul 20
YES
MSgt
1 Jan 21 - 30 Sep 21
after 1 Jul 20
NO
MSgt
1 Oct 21 - 31 Dec 21
prior to or equal to 1 Jul 21
YES
MSgt
1 Oct 21 - 31 Dec 21
after 1 Jul 21
NO
MSgt
1 Jan 22 - 30 Sep 22
prior to or equal to 1 Jul 21
YES
MSgt
1 Jan 22 - 30 Sep 22
after 1 Jul 21
NO
MSgt
1 Oct 22 - 31 Dec 22
prior to or equal to 1 Jul 22
YES
MSgt
1 Oct 22 - 31 Dec 22
after 1 Jul 22
NO
MSgt
1 Jan 23 - 30 Sep 23
prior to or equal to 1 Jul 22
YES
MSgt
1 Jan 23 - 30 Sep 23
after 1 Jul 22
NO
MSgt
1 Oct 23 - 31 Dec 23
prior to or equal to 1 Jul 23
YES
MSgt
1 Oct 23 - 31 Dec 23
after 1 Jul 23
NO
MSgt
1 Jan 24 - 30 Sep 24
prior to or equal to 1 Jul 23
YES
MSgt
1 Jan 24 - 30 Sep 24
after 1 Jul 23
NO
MSgt
1 Oct 24 - 31 Dec 24
prior to or equal to 1 Jul 24
YES
MSgt
1 Oct 24 - 31 Dec 24
after 1 Jul 24
NO
MSgt
1 Jan 25 - 30 Sep 25
prior to or equal to 1 Jul 24
YES
MSgt
1 Jan 25 - 30 Sep 25
after 1 Jul 24
NO
SMSGT CHART
If ratee is:
and EPR c/o date is:
and date of rank is:
TIG Eligible
SMSgt
1 Jan 16 - 31 Jul 16
prior to or equal to 1 Mar 15
YES
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 187
SMSgt
1 Jan 16 - 31 Jul 16
after 1 Mar 15
NO
SMSgt
1 Aug 16 - 31 Dec 16
prior to or equal to 1 Mar 16
YES
SMSgt
1 Aug 16 - 31 Dec 16
after 1 Mar 16
NO
SMSgt
1 Jan 17 - 31 Jul 17
prior to or equal to 1 Mar 16
YES
SMSgt
1 Jan 17 - 31 Jul 17
after 1 Mar 16
NO
SMSgt
1 Aug 17 - 31 Dec 17
prior to or equal to 1 Mar 17
YES
SMSgt
1 Aug 17 - 31 Dec 17
after 1 Mar 17
NO
SMSgt
1 Jan 18 - 31 Jul 18
prior to or equal to 1 Mar 17
YES
SMSgt
1 Jan 18 - 31 Jul 18
after 1 Mar 17
NO
SMSgt
1 Aug 18 - 31 Dec 18
prior to or equal to 1 Mar 18
YES
SMSgt
1 Aug 18 - 31 Dec 18
after 1 Mar 18
NO
SMSgt
1 Jan 19 - 31 Jul 19
prior to or equal to 1 Mar 18
YES
SMSgt
1 Jan 19 - 31 Jul 19
after 1 Mar 18
NO
SMSgt
1 Aug 19 - 31 Dec 19
prior to or equal to 1 Mar 19
YES
SMSgt
1 Aug 19 - 31 Dec 19
after 1 Mar 19
NO
SMSgt
1 Jan 20 - 31 Jul 20
prior to or equal to 1 Mar 19
YES
SMSgt
1 Jan 20 - 31 Jul 20
after 1 Mar 19
NO
SMSgt
1 Aug 20 - 31 Dec 20
prior to or equal to 1 Mar 20
YES
SMSgt
1 Aug 20 - 31 Dec 20
after 1 Mar 20
NO
SMSgt
1 Jan 21 - 31 Jul 21
prior to or equal to 1 Mar 20
YES
SMSgt
1 Jan 21 - 31 Jul 21
after 1 Mar 20
NO
SMSgt
1 Aug 21 - 31 Dec 21
prior to or equal to 1 Mar 21
YES
SMSgt
1 Aug 21 - 31 Dec 21
after 1 Mar 21
NO
SMSgt
1 Jan 22 - 31 Jul 22
prior to or equal to 1 Mar 21
YES
SMSgt
1 Jan 22 - 31 Jul 22
after 1 Mar 21
NO
SMSgt
1 Aug 22 - 31 Dec 22
prior to or equal to 1 Mar 22
YES
SMSgt
1 Aug 22 - 31 Dec 22
after 1 Mar 22
NO
SMSgt
1 Jan 23 - 31 Jul 23
prior to or equal to 1 Mar 22
YES
SMSgt
1 Jan 23 - 31 Jul 23
after 1 Mar 22
NO
SMSgt
1 Aug 23 - 31 Dec 23
prior to or equal to 1 Mar 23
YES
SMSgt
1 Aug 23 - 31 Dec 23
after 1 Mar 23
NO
SMSgt
1 Jan 24 - 31 Jul 24
prior to or equal to 1 Mar 23
YES
SMSgt
1 Jan 24 - 31 Jul 24
after 1 Mar 23
NO
SMSgt
1 Aug 24 - 31 Dec 24
prior to or equal to 1 Mar 24
YES
SMSgt
1 Aug 24 - 31 Dec 24
after 1 Mar 24
NO
SMSgt
1 Jan 25 - 31 Jul 25
prior to or equal to 1 Mar 24
YES
SMSgt
1 Jan 25 - 31 Jul 25
after 1 Mar 24
NO
SMSgt
1 Aug 25 - 31 Dec 25
prior to or equal to 1 Mar 25
YES
SMSgt
1 Aug 25 - 31 Dec 25
after 1 Mar 25
NO
Note: This table is used for static close-out date and out-of-cycle EPRs such as Directed
by Headquarters, DBC, etc.
188 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Table 4.12. Instructions for AF Form 912, Enlisted Performance Reports (CMSgt).
Note: Air Force terminology on the AF Form 912 applies to the equivalent Space Force
terminology (e.g., Airman applies to Guardian, Duty Air Force Specialty Code applies to
Duty Space Force Specialty Code).
SECTION I. RATEE IDENTIFICATION DATA
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
1
Name
Enter Last Name, First Name Middle Initial,
and any suffix (e.g., JR., SR., III). If there is no
middle initial, the use of “NMI” is optional.
Name will be in all upper case.
DOE, JOHN L.
2
SSN
Enter full social security number.
123456789
3
Grade
Enter appropriate grade.
CMSgt Select,
CMSgt
4
DAFSC
Enter DAFSC held as of the “THRU” date of
the evaluation, including prefix and suffix, if
applicable or in the event of PCS or PCA, or if a
member departs from a 365-day extended
deployment, use the information as of the
accounting date. 365-day extended
deployments will use the TDY DAFSC.
9E000
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 189
5
Organization,
Command and
Location
Enter information as of the SCOD or in the
event of PCS or PCA, or if a member departs
from a 365-day extended deployment, use the
information as of the accounting date.
Nomenclature does not necessarily duplicate
what is on the enlisted evaluation notice. The
goal is an accurate description of what unit,
location and command the ratee belongs.
Command will be listed inside parentheses.
365-day extended deployments will use home
station unit, “with duty at …”
AFR only: For IMAs, PIRR and PIRR
Category E, information will be that of unit of
attachment. Information will be in all
upper/lower case (use format in examples).
For Airmen who support Space Force, the
command will be annotated as “Air Force
Material Command (AFMC)”.
366th Force
Support Squadron
(ACC), Mountain
Home AFB ID
902nd Security
Forces Squadron
(AETC), Joint
Base San Antonio-
Randolph TX, with
duty at 447 ESFS
(USAFCENT),
Baghdad
International
Airport, Baghdad,
Iraq
HQ Air Combat
Command, Joint
Base Langley-
Eustis VA
6
PAS Code
Enter PAS code for ratee’s unit of assignment as
of the SCOD or in the event of PCS or PCA,
information as of the accounting date. For those
assigned to a 365-day extended deployment
billet, use the home station PAS code.
AFR only: For IMAs, PIRR and PIRR
Category E, use unit of attachment’s PAS code.
TE1CFYRZ
7
SRID
Enter SRID for ratee’s unit of assignment as of
the SCOD or in the event of PCS or PCA,
information as of the accounting date. For those
assigned to a 365-day extended deployment, use
the home station SRID.
AFR only: For IMAs, PIRR and PIRR
Category E, SRID is that of unit of attachment.
1LPCC
8
Reason for Report
Select the reason for evaluation.
Annual, Biennial,
Directed By
Commander, or
Directed by HAF
190 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
9
TAFMSD (RegAF) /
Pay Date (ARC)
The date the member entered military service.
Use date format in example.
4 Dec 2006
10
Period of Report
FROM DATE: See paragraph 4.6.
THRU DATE: 31 May of current year. This is
the SCOD for the appropriate grade. See
paragraph 4.7 for variations.
See paragraph 4.7
for variations.
11
Number of Days
Supervision
Enter the number of days of supervision. See
paragraph 4.8
365 (deduct only
the authorized
number of days
“non-rated” in
accordance with
paragraph 4.8)
12
HYT
Use date format in example. For the ANG,
enter the date the ratee turns 60 or the end date
of the ratee’s approved HYT waiver if obtained
in accordance with AFI 36-2606, Reenlistment
and Extension of Enlistment in the United States
Air Force.
1 Jan 2027
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 191
13
Duty Title
Enter the approved duty title from MilPDS as of
the SCOD or in the event of PCS or PCA,
information as of the accounting date.
If the duty title is abbreviated and entries are not
clear text, spell them out. Consult with your
CSS/MPF for any corrective actions. Ensure
the duty title is commensurate with the ratee’s
grade, AFSC/SFSC, and responsibility. Refer to
The Enlisted Force Structure for guidance
pertaining to duty titles.
(use format in example)
For personnel on a 365-day extended
deployment, use the deployed duty title.
Group Senior
Enlisted Leader
SECTION II. RATER’S PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
14
Comments
Minimum 1 line; if a referral, minimum 2 lines.
Must be bullet format. Four lines highly
encouraged when making current year
Command Chief Master Sergeant (CCM)
recommendation. May use “THIS LINE
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK” as
mandatory line.
Organizational Climate: See paragraph 1.8.9
- Spearheaded
rewrite of
DAFMAN 36-
2102…
SECTION III. RATER INFORMATION
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
192 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
15
Rater’s Name,
Grade, Branch of
Service,
Organization,
Command and
Location
Enter rater’s information as of the close-out
date. However, if the airman or guardian has a
Permanent Change of Station (PCS) or
Permanent Change of Assignment (PCA), or if a
member departs from a 365-day extended
deployment on or after the accounting date, use
the rater as of the established accounting date.
(use format in example)
Multiple general officers serving as evaluators
are prohibited, see paragraph
1.7.1.7 for exceptions. (T-1)
JOHN J. DOE,
Col, USAF
36th Air Base
Wing (PACAF)
For ANG:
CYNTHIA A.
HOLMAN, Lt Col,
NCANG 145th
Comptroller Flight
(AMC) Charlotte
ANGB NC
16
Duty Title
Enter rater’s duty title as of the SCOD.
However, if the airman or guardian has a
Permanent Change of Station (PCS) or
Permanent Change of Assignment (PCA) on or
after the accounting date, use the information as
of the established accounting date.
(use format in example)
Commander
17
SSN
Enter the last four digits of the social security
number.
2678
18
Date & Signature
The forms have digital signature and auto-date
capability. In the rare instance where digital
signatures cannot be used, sign in reproducible
blue or black ink and handwrite, stamp or type
the date. Do not sign blank forms or sign before
the SCOD (only on or after).
Digital or wet
signatures. A
combination of
both is authorized.
SECTION IV. SENIOR RATER’S PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
19
Concur/non-concur
Place an “X” in only one of the blocks.
X
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 193
20
Comments
Must be bullet format. Comments are
mandatory when the report is a referral or “Do
Not Retain” recommendation; otherwise, they
are optional if comments are not used insert
“THIS Line Intentionally Left Blank,” but
highly encouraged when making current year
Command Chief Master Sergeant nomination.
Organizational Climate: See paragraph 1.8.9
- Restructured
work order
schedule….
194 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
21
Consider for Higher
Responsibility
Select the block that accurately describes the
ratee’s next level of responsibility:
READY NOW - Select this category when
CMSgts are ready to immediately assume
greater responsibility in a more challenging
position than currently held.
ON-TRACK - Select this category when
CMSgts are excelling in their current position,
demonstrating growth potential, and are ready
to transition to a position in a related specialty,
or at a different organizational level, at the first
available opportunity.
CURRENT ASSIGNMENT - Select
this category when CMSgts should remain in
their current assignment for one or some of the
following reasons: are not forecasted to be
moved in the near-term; have not been
evaluated as a CMSgt in their current position;
may have a specific expertise required in-place;
be in pre-defined tour lengths; or be in
nominative positions.
GROOM - Select this category when CMSgts
require additional grooming in their duty
position or as a CMSgt prior to being placed in
a position with greater responsibilities. These
CMSgts may be ready for increased
responsibilities in the future.
DO NOT RETAIN – Select this category when
CMSgts are not recommended for retention. Do
not retain recommendations constitute a referral
evaluation and therefore require senior rater
comments in Section II, part 1. Comments that
exceed one line will require the use of an DAF
Form 77.
Use drop-down
function to select
level of
responsibility.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 195
22
Recommended
Future Roles
(Optional)
If the senior rater marks either “Ready Now,
On-Track, Current Assignment, or Groom” then
select the block that accurately describes the
ideal future roles (no more than two roles; first
recommendation or “primary vector” has
highest precedence).
Note: Senior raters may not recommend future
roles for those ratees considered “Do Not
Retain” for higher responsibility.
Note: Senior raters will stratify all CMSgts
receiving a primary vector for the current year’s
Command Chief Screening Board. (T-1)
CMSgts being nominated will be stratified
against all CMSgts under the senior rater’s
purview, not just those CMSgts eligible for or
nominated for CCM duty. (T-1) CMSgt
selects may not to be included in the total
number of CMSgts under the senior rater’s
purview.
Stratification is prohibited for those CMSgts not
receiving nomination for the current year’s
Command Chief Screening Board. CCM
nominations must be accompanied by a “Ready
Now” recommendation.
CMSgts not receiving a “Ready Now”
recommendation for higher responsibility are
not eligible for a primary vector CCM duty
nomination.
(RegAF Only) CMSgt ratees may only be
nominated for CCM duty provided they meet
the minimum CCM TIG requirements
established by AF/A1LE for the applicable
year’s Command Chief Screening Board.
Use drop-down
functions to select
future roles.
196 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
23
Senior Rater’s
Name, Grade,
Branch of Service,
Organization,
Command, and
Location
Enter rater’s information as of the close-out
date. However, if the airman or guardian has a
Permanent Change of Station (PCS) or
Permanent Change of Assignment (PCA) on or
after the accounting date, use the senior rater as
of the established accounting date.
(use format in example)
Multiple general officers serving as evaluators
are prohibited, see paragraph
1.7.1.7 for exceptions. (T-1)
JOHN J. DOE,
Col, USAF
10th Air Base
Wing (USAFA)
United States Air
Force Academy,
CO
For ANG:
LORA M.
TUREK, Col,
NCANG 145th
Airlift Wing
(AMC) Charlotte
ANGB NC
24
Duty Title
Enter senior rater’s duty title as of the SCOD.
However, if the airman or guardian has a
Permanent Change of Station (PCS) or
Permanent Change of Assignment (PCA) on or
after the accounting date, use the information as
of the established accounting date.
(use format in example)
Wing Commander
25
SSN
Enter the last four digits of the social security
number.
1111
26
Date & Signature
The forms have digital signature and auto-date
capability. In the rare instance where digital
signatures cannot be used, sign in reproducible
blue or black ink and handwrite, stamp or type
the date. Do not sign blank forms or sign before
the SCOD (only on or after).
Digital or wet
signatures. A
combination of
both is authorized.
SECTION V. FUNCTIONAL EXAMINER/AIR FORCE ADVISOR
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
27
Functional Examiner
or AF Advisor
When applicable, place an “X” in the
appropriate box.
X
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 197
28
Name, Grade,
Branch of Service,
Organization,
Command &
Location
Enter Functional Examiner or Air Force
Advisor information as of the close-out date.
However, if the airman has a Permanent Change
of Station (PCS) or Permanent Change of
Assignment (PCA) on or after the accountability
date, use the rater as of the established
accounting date.
(use format in example)
JANE R. DOE,
Lt Col, USAF
49th Wing (ACC)
Holloman AFB
NM
29
Duty Title
Enter advisor/examiner’s duty title as of the
SCOD.
(use format in example)
Financial Manager
30
SSN
Enter the last four digits of the social security
number.
0002
31
Date & Signature
The forms have digital signature and auto-date
capability. In the rare instance where digital
signatures cannot be used, sign in reproducible
blue or black ink and handwrite, stamp or type
the date. Do not sign blank forms or sign before
the SCOD (only on or after).
Digital or wet
signatures. A
combination of
both is authorized.
SECTION VI. RATEE’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
32
Date & Signature
The forms have digital signature and auto-date
capability. In the rare instance where digital
signatures cannot be used, sign in reproducible
blue or black ink and handwrite, stamp or type
the date. Do not sign blank forms or sign before
the SCOD (only on or after).
Digital or wet
signatures. A
combination of
both is authorized.
SECTION VII. REMARKS
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
198 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
33
Remarks
Use this section to spell out uncommon
acronyms alphabetically. Separate acronyms
with semicolons.
AFPC; Casualty
Report (CASREP)
SECTION VIII. REFERRAL REPORT
I
T E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
34
Referral Report
Complete this section for referral evaluations
only. See paragraph 1.10
35
Name, Grade,
Branch of Service of
Referring Evaluator
Enter: Name, Grade, Branch of Service of
referring evaluator.
JOE R. SMITH,
Lt Col, USAF
49th Wing (ACC)
Holloman AFB
NM
36
Duty Title
Enter referring evaluator duty title.
Wing Commander
37
Signature
Signature will be “wet” signature.
38
Date
Date will be handwritten/stamped/typed in day,
month and full year format.
12 Dec 2023
39
Signature of Ratee
Signature will be “wet” signature.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 199
Table 4.13. The United States Air Force Band (3N2X1) and The United States Air Force
Academy Band (3N3X1) Direct Reporting from Basic Military Training and Promotion to
TSgt.
I
T
E
M
If the Airman/Guardian
has
then the member’s
Initial enlisted
evaluation will begin
with Date of Rank and
have a close-out date of:
Examples
1
both a TAFMSD and DOR
between 2 July and 30
November of the same year
the following year’s TSgt
SCOD
1
2
any other combination of
TAFMSD and DOR
the first TSgt SCOD
following their DOR
2, 3, 4
Examples:
1. An Airman with a TAFMSD of 2 Jul 23 and DOR (E-6) of 8 Sep 23, would have an
INITIAL TSgt evaluation of 8 Sep 23 - 30 Nov 24.
2. An Airman with a TAFMSD of 1 Apr 23 and DOR (E-6) of 10 Jun 23, would have
an INITIAL TSgt EPR of 10 Jun 23 - 30 Nov 23.
3. An Airman with a TAFMSD of 1 Jul 19 and DOR (E-6) of 3 Sep 23, would have an
INITIAL TSgt EPR of 3 Sep 23 - 30 Nov 23.
4. An Airman with a TAFMSD of 1 Oct 23 and DOR (E-6) of 3 Dec 23, would have an
INITIAL TSgt EPR of 3 Dec 23 - 30 Nov 24.
Retraining guidance for Airmen selected to become a 3N2 or 3N3 TSgt (e.g., from
regional bands, or other Air Force Specialties):
If a member has no previous enlisted evaluations, an INITIAL report will be accomplished by
the premier band with a rating period from the date they arrived at their previous duty station
to the first 30 November TSgt SCOD following the new DOR (date arrived on station at
premier band), regardless of where member was assigned on the accountability date. The
losing unit will provide an LOE to assist in writing first TSgt EPR.
If a member has received a previous enlisted evaluation prior to becoming a 3N2 or 3N3
TSgt, an ANNUAL report will be accomplished by the premier band with a rating period
immediately following their last enlisted evaluation and close out on the first 30 November
TSgt SCOD following new DOR (date arrived on station at premier band), regardless of
where member was assigned on the accountability date. The losing unit will provide an LOE.
Note: If the member was already a TSgt prior to arrival at a premier band, the unit to which
they were assigned on the accountability date will maintain member on their MEL and will
accomplish the 30 November enlisted evaluation.
200 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Table 4.14. Instructions for Preparing an Enlisted ALQ Evaluation – CMSgt (RegAF and
ARC only).
ENLISTED ALQ EVALUATION
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
Heading
Instructions
Example
1
Grade
Select appropriate grade. See
paragraph 1.4.9.
CMSgt Select,
CMSgt
2
Name
Enter Last Name, First Name,
Middle Initial, and any suffix
(e.g., JR., SR., III). If there is no
middle initial, the use of “NMI”
is optional. Name will be in all
upper case.
DOE,
MATTHEW A.
3
DoDID
Enter full DoDID number
1234567890
4
Duty Title
Enter the approved duty title
from MilPDS as of the SCOD or
in the event of a PCS or PCA, or
if a member departs from a 365-
day extended deployment, use
the information as of the
accounting date.
If the duty title is abbreviated and
entries are not clear text, spell
them out. Consult with the
CSS/MPF for any corrective
actions. Ensure the duty title is
commensurate with the ratee’s
grade, AFSC/SFSC, and
responsibility. Refer to the
Enlisted Force Structure for
guidance pertinent to duty titles.
(use format in example)
For personnel on a 365-day
extended deployment, use the
deployed duty title.
Group Senior
Enlisted Leader
5
DAFSC
Enter DAFSC held as of the
“THRU” date of the evaluation,
9E000
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 201
including prefix and suffix, if
applicable, or in the event of a
PCS or PCA, or if a member
departs from a 365-day extended
deployment, use the information
as of the accounting date. 365-
day extended deployments will
use the TDY DAFSC.
6
Reason
Select the reason for evaluation.
Annual, Biennial,
Directed by
Commander, or
Directed by HAF
7
Period
“FROM” Date: See paragraph
4.6.
“THRU” Date: 31 May of
current year. This is the SCOD
for the appropriate grade. See
paragraph 4.7 for variations.
1 Jun 23 thru 31
May 24
8
Days Supervised
Enter the number of days of
supervision. See paragraph 4.8.
365
9
Days Non-Rated
Enter number of days Non-Rated
(if applicable) in accordance with
paragraph 1.4.11.
120
10
Organization and Command
Enter information as of close-out
date, or in the event of a PCS or
PCA, or if a member departs
from a 365-day extended
deployment, use the information
as of the accounting date.
Nomenclature does not
necessarily duplicate what is on
the evaluation notice. The goal is
an accurate description of where
and to whom the ratee belongs.
Command will be listed inside
parentheses. 365-day extended
deployments will use the home
station unit, “with duty at…”
AFR only: For IMAs, PIRR and
PIRR Category E, information
will be that of unit of attachment.
See paragraph 1.4.7.
123d Fighter
Squadron (ACC)
11
Location
Enter information as of close-out
date, or in the event of a PCS or
JB Langley-
Eustis, VA
202 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
PCA, or if a member departs
from a 365-day extended
deployment, use the information
as of the accounting date..
12
Duty Description
Comments in narrative format
are mandatory.
Enter information about the
position the ratee held in the unit
and the nature or level of job
responsibilities. The rater
develops the information for this
section.
This description must reflect the
uniqueness of each ratee’s job.
Be specific—include level of
responsibility, number of people
supervised, dollar value of
resources accountable
for/projects managed, etc. Make
it clear; use plain English. Avoid
jargon and topical references—
they obscure rather than clarify
meaning. Only acronyms on the
approved acronym list are
authorized.
Previous jobs held during the
reporting period may be
mentioned only if it impacts the
evaluation.
365-day extended deployments
will use the TDY duty
description.
Supervises 2
Airmen. Authors
guidance on
performance
evaluations.
Prepares lesson
plans for ALS
curriculum.
RATER ASSESSMENT
13
Executing the Mission
Comments are mandatory; must
include at least one performance
statement. See paragraph
1.6.3.11.1. May use “THIS
SECTION NOT USED” as a
mandatory performance
statement.
See paragraph
1.3.3.2.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 203
14
Leading People
Comments are mandatory; must
include at least one performance
statement. See paragraph
1.6.3.11.2. May use “THIS
SECTION NOT USED” as a
mandatory performance
statement.
See paragraph
1.3.3.2.
15
Managing Resources
Comments are mandatory; must
include at least one performance
statement. See paragraph
1.6.3.11.3. May use “THIS
SECTION NOT USED” as a
mandatory performance
statement.
See paragraph
1.3.3.2.
16
Improving the Unit
Comments are mandatory; must
include at least one performance
statement. See paragraph
1.6.3.11.4. May use “THIS
SECTION NOT USED” as a
mandatory performance
statement.
See paragraph
1.3.3.2.
17
Mandatory Comments
(Housing/Voting)
If ratee has oversight of military
privatized housing and or is a
voting assistance officer, enter
the appropriate statement(s).
Rater must also include a unique
performance statement(s). See
paragraphs 1.8.10, and 1.11.5.
If required, enter the applicable
statement(s) “The Ratee
exercised effective oversight of
military privatized housing.” Or
“The Ratee was not effective in
oversight of military privatized
housing.”
If required, enter a unique
performance statement on the
ratee’s performance as the voting
assistance officer.
See paragraph
1.3.3.2.
18
Rater Name, Grade, and Branch
of Service
Enter rater’s information as of
the close-out date. However, if
the airman has a Permanent
Change of Station (PCS) or
SUE J. DOE, Col,
USAF
SALLY S.
204 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Permanent Change of
Assignment (PCA) on or after the
accounting date, use the rater as
of the established accounting
date.
See paragraph 1.4.12.
Multiple general officers serving
as general evaluators are
prohibited, see paragraph
1.7.1.7 for exceptions.
MESAROS, SES,
DAF
JEREMEY R.
DICE, GS-15,
DAF
JACOB M.
FREER, Col,
KSANG
19
Rater Duty Title
Enter the rater’s information as
of the SCOD. However, if the
airman has a Permanent Change
of Station (PCS) or Permanent
Change of Assignment (PCA) on
or after the accounting date, use
the information as of the
established accounting date.
Commander
20
Rater Organization and
Command
Enter the rater’s information as
of the SCOD. However, if the
airman has a Permanent Change
of Station (PCS) or Permanent
Change of Assignment (PCA) or
if a member departs from a 365-
day extended deployment on or
after the accounting date, use the
information as of the established
accounting date.
366th Fighter
Squadron (ACC)
21
Rater Signature
The evaluations have digital
signature capability which
includes a date stamp. In the rare
instance where digital signatures
cannot be used, sign in
reproducible blue or black ink
and handwrite, stamp, or type the
date next to the signature (DD
MMM YY).
Do not sign blank forms that do
not contain comments and/or
ratings, sign before the close-out
date (only on or after), or date
before the date the rater signed it
or earlier than the date of the
ratee’s endorsement to a referral
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 205
letter.
HIGHER LEVEL REVIEWER ASSESSMENT
22
Higher Responsibility
Select the block that accurately
describes the ratee’s next level of
responsibility:
READY NOW - Select this
category when CMSgts are ready
to immediately assume greater
responsibility in a more
challenging position than
currently held.
ON-TRACK - Select this
category when CMSgts are
excelling in their current
position, demonstrating growth
potential, and are ready to
transition to a position in a
related specialty, or at a different
organizational level, at the first
available opportunity.
CURRENT ASSIGNMENT -
Select
this category when CMSgts
should remain in their current
assignment for one or some of
the following reasons: are not
forecasted to be moved in the
near-term; have not been
evaluated as a CMSgt in their
current position; may have a
specific expertise required in-
place; be in pre-defined tour
lengths; or be in nominative
positions.
GROOM - Select this category
when CMSgts require additional
grooming in their duty position
or as a CMSgt prior to being
placed in a position with greater
responsibilities. These CMSgts
may be ready for increased
Use drop-down
function to select
level of
responsibility.
206 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
responsibilities in the future.
DO NOT RETAIN – Select this
category when CMSgts are not
recommended for retention. Do
not retain recommendations
constitute a referral evaluation
and therefore require senior rater
comments in Section II, part 1.
Comments that exceed one line
will require the use of an DAF
Form 77.
23
Rater Assessment
Concur/non-concur with the
rater’s assessment by making the
appropriate selection.
24
Future Roles
If the senior rater marks either
“Ready Now, On-Track, Current
Assignment, or Groom” then
select the block that accurately
describes the ideal future roles
(no more than two roles; first
recommendation or “primary
vector” has highest precedence).
Note: Senior raters may not
recommend future roles for those
ratees considered “Do Not
Retain” for higher responsibility.
Note: Senior raters will stratify
all CMSgts receiving a primary
vector for the current year’s
Command Chief Screening
Board. (T-1) CMSgts being
nominated will be stratified
against all CMSgts under the
senior rater’s purview, not just
those CMSgts eligible for or
nominated for CCM duty.
(T-1) CMSgt selects may not be
included in the total number of
CMSgts under the senior rater’s
purview.
Stratification is prohibited for
those CMSgts not receiving
Use drop-down
functions to select
future roles.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 207
nomination for the current year’s
Command Chief Screening
Board. CCM nominations must
be accompanied by a “Ready
Now” recommendation.
CMSgts not receiving a “Ready
Now” recommendation for
higher responsibility are not
eligible for a primary vector
CCM duty nomination.
(RegAF Only) CMSgt ratees may
only be nominated for CCM duty
provided they meet the minimum
CCM TIG requirements
established by AF/A1LE for the
applicable year’s Command
Chief Screening Board.
25
Comment(s)
Comments are mandatory; must
include at least one performance
statement. See paragraph
1.6.3.11.1. May use “THIS
SECTION NOT USED” as a
mandatory performance
statement.
See paragraph
1.3.3.2.
26
Higher Level Reviewer Name,
Grade, and Branch of Service
For HLRs assigned on or prior to
the SCOD, enter information as
of the SCOD; for HLRs assigned
after the SCOD, enter the
information as of the date signed.
Multiple general officers serving
as evaluators are prohibited. See
paragraph 1.7.1.7 for
exceptions.
SUE J. DOE, Col,
USAF
SALLY S.
MESAROS, SES,
DAF
JEREMEY R.
DICE, GS-15,
DAF
JACOB M.
FREER, Col,
KSANG
27
Higher Level Reviewer Duty
Title
For HLRs assigned on or prior to
the SCOD, enter information as
of the SCOD; for HLRs assigned
after the SCOD, enter the
information as of the date signed.
Commander
208 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
28
Higher Level Reviewer
Organization and Command
For HLRs assigned on or prior to
the SCOD, enter information as
of the SCOD; for HLRs assigned
after the SCOD, enter the
information as of the date signed.
123d Operations
Group (ACC)
29
Higher Level Reviewer Signature
The evaluations have digital
signature capability which
includes a date stamp. In the rare
instance where digital signatures
cannot be used, sign in
reproducible blue or black ink
and handwrite, stamp, or type the
date next to the signature (DD
MMM YY).
Do not sign blank forms that do
not contain comments and/or
ratings, sign before the close-out
date (only on or after), or date
before the date the rater signed it
or earlier than the date of the
ratee’s endorsement to a referral
letter.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
30
Comment(s)
Complete only if criteria are met
for additional comments.
If not needed, state, “THIS
SECTION NOT USED”
31
Evaluator Name, Grade, and
Branch of Service
Enter evaluator’s information as
of the SCOD.
32
Role
Enter evaluator’s role.
Air Force
Advisor,
Functional
Examiner
33
Evaluator Duty Title
Enter evaluators duty title as of
the SCOD.
Financial
Manager
34
Evaluator Organization and
Command
Enter evaluator’s information as
of the SCOD.
35
Evaluator Signature
The evaluations have digital
signature capability which
includes a date stamp. In the rare
instance where digital signatures
cannot be used, sign in
reproducible blue or black ink
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 209
and handwrite, stamp, or type the
date next to the signature (DD
MMM YY).
Do not sign blank forms that do
not contain comments and/or
ratings, sign before the close-out
date (only on or after), or date
before the date the rater signed it
or earlier than the date of the
ratee’s endorsement to a referral
letter.
REFERRAL REPORT
36
Referral Report Comments
Complete this section for referral
evaluations only. See
paragraph 1.10
37
Referring Evaluator Name,
Grade, and Branch of Service
Enter the referring evaluator’s
information as of the SCOD.
38
Referring Evaluator Duty Title
Enter the referring evaluator’s
information as of the SCOD.
39
Referring Evaluator Signature
The evaluations have digital
signature capability which
includes a date stamp. In the rare
instance where digital signatures
cannot be used, sign in
reproducible blue or black ink
and handwrite, stamp, or type the
date next to the signature (DD
MMM YY).
Do not sign blank forms that do
not contain comments and/or
ratings, sign before the close-out
date (only on or after), or date
before the date the rater signed it
or earlier than the date of the
ratee’s endorsement to a referral
letter.
40
Date
Date will auto populate when
report is signed.
27 Mar 2023
41
Ratee Acknowledgement
The ratee must acknowledge
receipt prior to the evaluation
becoming a matter of record by
signing in this block. Signing the
evaluation does not imply
concurrence, but
Digital or wet
signatures. A
combination of
both is
authorized.
210 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
acknowledgement and review of
personal information on the
evaluation. If the ratee non-
concurs with the evaluation, they
may submit an appeal in
accordance with Chapter 10.
The rater will suspense the ratee
three duty days (30 calendar days
for ARC) to sign the evaluation.
Non-digital: Handwrite, date
stamp or type the date. Sign on
or after the close-out date.
43
Signature of Ratee
The evaluations have digital
signature capability which
includes a date stamp. In the rare
instance where digital signatures
cannot be used, sign in
reproducible blue or black ink
and handwrite, stamp, or type the
date next to the signature (DD
MMM YY).
Do not sign blank forms that do
not contain comments and/or
ratings, sign before the close-out
date (only on or after), or date
before the date the rater signed it
or earlier than the date of the
ratee’s endorsement to a referral
letter.
44
Date
Date will auto populate when
report is signed.
27 Mar 2023
Note: There are minor formatting differences between the PDF version of the Enlisted
Performance Brief (AF Form 716) and the system generated version completed in myEval.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 211
Chapter 5
DAF FORM 77, LETTER OF EVALUATION
5.1. Purpose. Letters of Evaluation (LOE) assist raters in preparing officer and enlisted
evaluations and are most often used when the ratee is under the supervision of someone other than
the official rater. Raters may request LOEs from deployed/TDY supervisors or former supervisors
with less than 120 calendar days of supervision during the evaluation reporting period.
5.2. Types of LOEs.
5.2.1. Formal LOEs. Formal LOEs, commonly known as the mandatory LOEs, are filed in
the member’s official records (ARMS and PRDA). Complete mandatory LOEs for the
following:
5.2.1.1. Deployed Commander. Documents performance of deployed officers (RegAF,
USSF, Guard, or Reserve) through the grade of colonel appointed on G-series orders to fill
detachment, squadron, group, and wing/delta commander positions for at least 45 calendar
days. These LOEs will not restart the officer evaluation “clock” regardless of the TDY
tour length. They are considered “embedded” evaluations. Further, there is no required
minimum or maximum number of days of supervision. Officers filling 365-day
deployments as the detachment, squadron, group, or wing/delta commander will receive
an officer evaluation in accordance with paragraph 3.9.
5.2.1.1.1. A negative assessment or comments will make the LOE a referral and
require additional rater comments. If the evaluation is a referral, the reverse side of the
form (Section VIII) is also completed. There is no minimum number of days required
for completion of a referral LOE. Note: A non-concur does not necessarily make the
report a referral.
5.2.1.1.2. Two evaluators, the rater and additional rater, will complete the DAF Form
77. (T-1) However, if the rater is a general officer, then the rater is considered a single
evaluator and an additional rater is not required unless the report is a referral.
5.2.1.1.3. The form may be typed or handwritten and completed no later than 7
calendar days after ratee relinquishes command. The goal is to ensure that the LOE is
completed before returning to home station. The FROM and THRU dates are
determined by the date assumed/relinquished command.
5.2.1.1.4. LOEs will be accepted directly from individual officers. However, they will
not be processed until the PERSCO team or the Air Force forward (AFFOR)/A1
verifies the eligibility of the officer. (T-1) The officer should contact their PERSCO
team or AFFOR A1 to route the LOE through the appropriate channels.
5.2.1.2. Deployment/Contingency Operations. Document performance for deployed
personnel not assigned to a deployed commander’s billet when there are 60 or more days
of supervision. While an LOE is mandatory, it will not be filed in the member’s official
record. Note: When the home station rater is also the deployed rater, an LOE is not
required.
5.2.1.2.1. There are no official means to track LOEs in a deployed/contingency
operation environment. The rater and ratee are responsible for accomplishing the LOE
212 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
and ensuring it is forwarded to the ratee’s home station rater. Contact the PERSCO
team for local procedures.
5.2.1.2.2. An LOE may be accomplished for periods shorter than 60 days. There is no
maximum number of days of supervision.
5.2.1.2.3. Complete LOEs no later than 7 calendar days from departure. When
circumstances preclude a rater from accomplishing a LOE at the time of departure,
every effort should be made to complete and provide a LOE to the home station when
feasible.
5.2.1.2.4. Failure to receive a LOE is not grounds to appeal a future evaluation based
on the absence or lack of deployment information in an evaluation.
5.2.1.3. PCS/PCA Departures. Document periods for ratees who will PCS/PCA prior to
the SCOD. In cases where the rater departs, complete a draft enlisted evaluation to fulfill
this requirement. While an LOE is mandatory, it will not be filed in the member’s official
record.
5.2.1.4. Period of Supervision. Document periods of supervision of at least 60 calendar
days but not enough to require an officer evaluation, less than 120 calendar days of
supervision.
5.2.1.5. Separation. For A1Cs or Spc3s and below with less than 36 months total active
federal military service, an LOE is required for separation cases involving parenthood,
conditions that interfere with military service, unsatisfactory performance, or failure in the
fitness program. If the ratee is separating to go into the ARC or transferring to another
branch of service, an evaluation is required. (T-1) However, for officers only, if there is
less than 120 calendar days of supervision an LOE is required. See Table 5.1.
5.2.2. Informal LOEs. Informal LOEs, commonly known as the optional LOEs, are not filed
in the member’s official records/ARMS and PRDA or attached to the completed evaluation.
5.2.2.1. Raters may use the information from the LOE at their discretion. When used,
information may be paraphrased or directly quoted from the LOE.
5.2.3. Supplemental LOEs. Supplemental LOEs are filed in the member’s official records
(ARMS and PRDA), attached to the evaluation they are supplementing.
5.2.3.1. Types of Supplemental LOEs include:
5.2.3.1.1. Continuation sheet for referral evaluations.
5.2.3.1.2. Continuation sheet for evaluator disagreements.
5.2.3.1.3. Continuation sheet for the Air Force or Space Force Advisor.
5.2.3.1.4. Continuation sheet for the Functional/Acquisition Examiner.
5.2.4. Administrative LOEs. Administrative LOEs are filed in the member’s official records
(ARMS and PRDA) to document missing, lost, removed, or voided evaluations.
5.2.4.1. Administrative LOEs are not derogatory in nature.
5.2.4.2. Administrative LOEs are used to justify legitimate gaps between evaluations such
as:
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 213
5.2.4.2.1. To document a break in service. See Table 5.1.
5.2.4.2.2. To document extended periods of lost time, including prisoner status and
appellate leave. Upon release, an DAF Form 77 will be accomplished by the servicing
MPF or CSS. The start date will be the day after the close-out of the last evaluation
and the end date will be the day the member is released from confinement. The next
evaluation will begin the day after the close-out date of the LOE. See Table 5.1.
5.2.4.2.3. To document educational leaves of absence, e.g., Bootstrap and/or
educational leave to a civilian institution. See Table 5.1.
5.2.4.2.4. To document a legitimate gap when the ratee was on the temporary disability
retired list and later removed and returned to duty. See Table 5.1.
5.2.4.2.5. (USSF only) All enlisted Guardians who transfer to the USSF from the
Army, Navy, and Marine Corps will require an administrative LOE to align with the
appropriate SCOD.
5.2.4.3. Administrative LOEs are used to substitute lost, missing or removed evaluations
such as those:
5.2.4.3.1. Ordered removed by the AFBCMR, in accordance with DAFI 36-2603. See
Table 5.1.
5.2.4.3.2. Ordered removed by the ERAB in accordance with Chapter 10. See Table
5.1.
5.2.4.3.3. Lost and/or missing evaluations in which all actions to locate lost and/or
missing evaluations have failed. See paragraph 1.14 for procedures and Table 5.1 for
preparation of the DAF Form 77.
5.2.4.4. The use of administrative LOEs must be approved by AFPC or ARPC prior to
filing them into the member’s official records (ARMS and PRDA).
5.2.5. Other Purposes. AFPC/DPMSPE may use the DAF Form 77 to document when a board
specific PRF is not required or available as stated below:
5.2.5.1. For officers on appellate leave or in prisoner status.
5.2.5.2. For officers who enter RegAF or the Space Force directly into Air Force-level or
Space Force-level training.
5.2.5.3. For officers who have a break in service and reenter directly into Air Force-level
or Space Force-level training.
5.3. Who Can Prepare.
5.3.1. Raters or any evaluators. Do not skip evaluators who are temporarily unavailable or to
afford a higher-level evaluator the opportunity to endorse or comment on the LOE.
5.3.2. Personnel responsible for observing a ratee’s performance when the ratee is not under
the direct supervision of the designated rater.
5.3.3. Personnel directed to do so by the Air Force Board of Correction or ERAB.
5.3.4. MPF or CSS/HR specialist personnel as authorized.
214 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
5.4. Administrative Practices.
5.4.1. LOEs will cover the period from the first day of supervision (or the day following the
close-out date of the last officer evaluation, enlisted evaluation, or TR, whichever is later)
through the last day of supervision.
5.4.2. DAF Form 77 may be typed or handwritten.
5.4.3. Limit comments to space provided on formal LOEs. If additional space is required on
informal or supplemental LOEs, continue comments on a separate page and attach it to the
LOE.
5.4.4. Correct minor errors using a pen or correction fluid. Corrections and/or erasures that
change the meaning of a sentence must be initialed. Re-accomplish forms with excessive
corrections and/or erasures. Do not use self-adhesive correction tape.
5.4.5. Prepare LOEs in one copy.
5.4.6. Prepare LOEs using bullet format only.
5.4.7. Prohibited Comments. See paragraph 1.12 for prohibited comments.
5.4.8. Raters may show an DAF Form 77 to the ratee.
5.5. Completing DAF Form 77, Letter of Evaluation.
5.5.1. See Table 5.1 for step-by-step procedures on completing all LOEs.
5.5.2. Deployed Commander LOEs. See paragraph 5.2.1.2.1.
5.5.3. Formal LOEs. See paragraph 5.2.1.
5.5.4. General Officer (to include selects) LOEs. See Chapter 7.
5.6. Routing, Updating and Disposition Responsibilities.
5.6.1. Informal LOEs will not be placed in the Master Personnel Record Group. For all other
informal LOEs, to include deployed enlisted ANG AGR/Statutory Tour personnel, the
rater/supervisor forwards the completed form to the MPF, CSS/HR specialist PERSCO team
who will, in turn, forward to the ratee’s new and/or designated rater.
5.6.2. Supplemental LOEs are required to be attached to the evaluation they are supplementing
and will be made a matter of record. They will be placed in the OSR/SNCO selection record
attached to the documents they are supplementing. A copy will be forwarded to ARMS and
PRDA. (T-1)
5.6.3. Administrative LOEs are required to be placed in the OSR or SNCO selection record,
ARMS and PRDA to substitute a missing evaluation or explain a gap between evaluations.
The preparing agency forwards the original to the OSR or SNCO selection record, ARMS, and
PRDA. Perform any updates if required.
5.6.4. For all other LOEs not listed above, contact AFPC/DPMSPE or ARPC/DPT for
procedures and/or further guidance.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 215
5.7. MPF, CSS/HR Specialist, and PERSCO Team Responsibilities.
5.7.1. Quality review LOEs and take corrective action if appropriate.
5.7.2. When applicable, make appropriate updates and forward the LOE to the rater pending
the next evaluation.
5.7.3. Provide LOEs to the member’s rater for use in preparing the next performance
evaluation or training report. LOEs closing during the period of the performance evaluation
will accompany the evaluation notice through the rating chain and remain with the notice and
evaluation until received by the MPF.
5.7.4. Forward LOEs to the member’s gaining MPF or CSS/HR specialist when the member
departs PCS, and no evaluation was required prior to departure.
5.7.5. Give the LOE to the member upon separation, retirement, or completion of the next
performance evaluation. Note: LOEs closing during the period of the performance evaluation
will accompany the evaluation notice through the rating chain and remain with the notice and
evaluation until received by the MPF or CSS/HR specialist. Once the MPF or CSS/HR
specialist determines the evaluation is acceptable for processing to file, they return the LOE to
the ratee.
5.7.6. PERSCO Team Specific Responsibilities.
5.7.6.1. Identifies raters’ and ratees’ projected departure dates to AFFOR/A1, works with
AFFOR/A1 to review and validate the list of commanders they service on G-series orders,
and establish tracking and suspense control for all deployed commander LOEs at the
deployed location. See paragraph 5.6 for disposition of completed LOEs.
5.7.6.2. Provide the deployed rating chain the G-series order number and date for LOE
preparation.
5.7.6.3. Upon receipt of final LOEs from deployed rating chain, verify if an Air Force or
Space Force advisor is required and forward to the Air Force or Space Force advisor if
required.
5.7.6.4. Final disposition of completed deployed commander LOEs.
5.7.6.4.1. Digitally signed LOEs: Upload the completed DAF Form 77 according to
the Personnel Services Delivery Guide and submit to AFPC/ARPC for transmission to
ARMS and PRDA.
5.7.6.4.2. Wet signature LOEs. PERSCO teams upload the completed DAF Form 77
according to the Personnel Services Delivery Guide. PERSCO teams without system
access will mail the completed DAF Form 77 to AFPC/DPMSPE, 550 C Street West
Suite 7, Joint Base San Antonio-Randolph, TX 78150. When the servicing PERSCO
team is not collocated with the rater, the rater will mail the form to AFPC/DPMSPE.
If in a location where there is no mailing capability, PERSCO teams will place the
completed form in a pre-addressed envelope and seal it. The ratee, rater, PERSCO
team member, or trusted agent will be allowed to hand-carry and mail the form at first
opportunity.
216 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
5.7.7. Additional Processing Responsibilities.
5.7.7.1. AFPC/DPMSPE
5.7.7.1.1. Upon receipt of the DAF Form 77, AFPC/DPMSPE will validate the form
and update MilPDS for RegAF or Space Force officers and send to ARMS and PRDA.
5.7.7.1.2. If it is determined that the officer is not eligible at any time in the process,
then the LOE will be changed to “Optional” and forwarded to member’s home unit
rater.
5.7.7.1.3. For RegAF or USSF officers, AFPC/DPMSPE forwards original, digitally
signed LOEs to ARMS and PRDA. For colonels, AFPC/DPMSPE sends “wet” signed
LOEs to ARMS and PRDA, AF/A1LO or SF/S1L, and either mail or email a scanned
copy to the respective MAJCOM/FLDCOM and MPF, if applicable.
5.7.7.1.4. For ARC officers, AFPC/DPMSPE forwards the original to ARPC/DPT,
who will then be responsible for distribution and/or update to applicable organizations,
depending on component and status.
5.7.7.2. ARPC/DPT and AF/A1LO.
5.7.7.2.1. Will coordinate with AFPC/DPMSPE to identify officers meeting upcoming
promotion boards.
5.7.7.2.2. Will conduct a quality control review of all deployed commander LOEs,
process through ARMS and PRDA, and file the LOE in the officer’s OSR.
5.7.7.3. ARMS. Once a deployed commander LOE is received, it will be stored in ARMS.
5.7.7.4. MAJCOM, FLDCOM or Combatant/Component Command. Responsible for
designating the AF advisor (must be a colonel or above) when the final evaluator for a
deployed commander LOE is not an AF officer or Department of the Air Force official.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 217
Table 5.1. Instructions for Completing the DAF Form 77, Letter of Evaluation. See Note 5.
SECTION I. RATEE IDENTIFICATION DATA
Item/Description
Instructions
1. Name
Enter Last Name, First Name, Middle Initial and JR., SR., III,
etc. Use of “NMI” (no middle initial) is optional. The name
will be in all upper case.
2. Social Security Number
Enter the Social Security Number.
3. Grade
Drop Down Menu. Select the appropriate grade. See Note 1.
4. Duty Air Force Specialty
Code or Duty Space Force
Specialty Code
Enter the Duty Air Force Specialty Code or Duty Space Force
Specialty Code held as of the THRU date of the evaluation to
include prefix and suffix.
5. Duty Title or Title of
Additional Duty
Enter the approved duty title as of the THRU date of the
evaluation.
6. Deployed Location or
Name Operation
Deployed CC LOE only. If applicable, enter the
operation/contingency name ratee was deployed in support of.
(e.g., Operation ENDURING FREEDOM).
SECTION II. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
Item/Description
Instructions
PART A - Type of Report
Drop Down Menu.
For formal/informal LOEs, enter: Letter of Evaluation
For supplemental sheets, enter: Supplemental Sheet
For acquisition examiner, functional examiner, Air Force or
Space Force advisor, enter: Acquisition Examiner, Functional
Examiner, Air Force or Space Force Advisor
For administrative LOE: leave blank.
SECTION II. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
Item/Description
Instructions
PART B
1. From
Thru
See Note 2
From Date: Enter the date supervision began
Thru Date: Enter the date supervision ended
2. Report Is
Drop Down Menu. Select either Mandatory or Optional. See
Table 5.2.
3. Level of Deployed
Commander Duties
Performed
Deployed CC LOE Only. Drop Down Menu. Select either,
Detachment CC, Squadron CC, Group CC, or Wing CC.
4. Number of Days in
Commander Position
Deployed CC LOE Only. Enter the number of consecutive days
served in the deployed commander position, on G-series orders.
5. G-Series Order Number
Deployed CC LOE Only. Enter the G-series order number.
218 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Date of Order
Deployed CC LOE Only. Enter the date of the G-series order.
SECTION III. DEPLOYED COMMANDER ASSESSMENT (For Deployed CCs Only)
Item/Description
Instructions
Officer Satisfactorily
Completed Their Deployed
Command Tour
Deployed CC LOE Only. Select “Yes” if the officer
satisfactorily completed their deployed commander tour. Select
“No” if completion was unsatisfactory. If “No,” the report must
be referred.
SECTION IV. COMMENTS/ IMPACT ON MISSION ACCOMPLISHMENT
Item/Description
Instructions
Comments Area
This section is prepared by the deployed rater and the focus of
the evaluation should be on what the officer did and on the
officer’s leadership, team building, and problem-solving
abilities in accomplishing the mission. Limit comments to
space provided on formal LOEs. If additional space is required
on informal or supplemental LOEs, continue comments on a
separate page and attach it to the LOE. Comments must be in
bullet format. See paragraph 1.12 for prohibited comments;
paragraph 1.11 and Notes 5 and 6 for mandatory comments;
and paragraph 1.10 for referral procedures.
SECTION V. RATER IDENTIFICATION DATA (See Note 3)
Item/Description
Instructions
Name, Grade, Branch of
Service, Organization,
Command, Location
Enter evaluator identification as of the close-out date.
Duty Title
Enter authorized deployed duty title.
Date
Digital signatures will auto-date form. If not available
handwrite, type or stamp. Do not date before close-out date.
Social Security Number
Enter last four of the evaluator’s social security number
Signature
Digitally Sign. If digital capability is unavailable, wet sign in
reproducible blue or black ink. Do not sign before the close-out
date.
SECTION VI. ADDITIONAL RATER (Deployed CC Letter of Evaluation Only)
Item/Description
Instructions
Concur/Non-concur Boxes
Place an “X” in the appropriate box. If non-concur is marked,
explain the reason for the non-concurrence in the comments
area.
Comments Area
Insert comments only if referral or to document non-
concurrence. Referral LOEs must contain the applicable
mandatory statement in accordance with paragraph
1.10.5.3.2.2.
Name, Grade, Branch of
Service, Organization,
Command, Location
Enter the name in all uppercase. Enter evaluator identification
in upper/lower or all upper case. All information will be as of
the close-out date. See Note 3.
Duty Title
Enter the duty title as of the close-out.
Date
Digital signatures will auto-date form. If not available
handwrite, type or stamp. Do not date before close-out date.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 219
Social Security Number
Enter last four of the evaluator’s social security number
Signature
Digitally Sign. If digital capability is unavailable, wet sign in
reproducible blue or black ink. Do not sign before the close-out
date.
SECTION VII. RATEE’S ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Item/Description
Instructions
I understand my signature
does not constitute agreement
or disagreement
Drop Down Menu. If ratee is unavailable or refuses to sign,
select the applicable statement, “Ratee Unavailable to Sign” and
“Ratee Declined to Sign.” In this case the rater or additional
rater in the rating chain may sign for the ratee.
Signature
Digitally Sign. If digital capability is unavailable or the LOE is
a referral, wet sign in in reproducible blue or black ink. Do not
sign before the close-out date.
Date
Digital signatures will auto-date form. If not available
handwrite, type or stamp. Do not date before close-out date.
SECTION VIII. REFERRAL REPORT (Deployed CC LOE Only) (All other referral
LOEs must use the same procedures as outlined in Chapter 5. The DAF Form 77 is
designed to include the referral memorandum directly on the form.)
Item/Description
Instructions
I am referring.
State specifically what comments make the LOE a referral.
Send Comments to
Enter the grade and name of the referring evaluator’s deployed
rater.
Name, Grade, Branch of
Service of Referring
Evaluator
Enter evaluator identification as of the close-out date. See Note
3. If the evaluator named in this section is the additional rater,
Section VI will be completed in accordance with paragraph
1.10.
Duty Title
Enter the duty title as of the close-out date.
Date
Dates will be handwritten, typed or stamped. Do not date
before the close-out date. The ratee has 3 duty days (30
calendar days for ANG/AFR) to submit comments and the
rebuttal. All supporting documentation is limited to a total of
10 pages, 5 pages front and back.
Signature
Wet sign in reproducible blue or black ink. Do not sign before
the close-out date.
SECTION VIII. REFERRAL REPORT (Deployed CC LOE Only)
Item/Description
Instructions
Signature of Ratee
Signature is for acknowledging receipt. It does not constitute
agreement or disagreement. Wet sign in reproducible blue or
black ink. Do not sign before the close-out date.
Date
Date may be handwritten, typed or stamped. Do not date before
close-out date.
SECTION IX. REFERRAL REVIEWER (Deployed CC Letter of Evaluation Only. Used
Only if Additional Rater Refers the letter of evaluation or as authorized by AFPC/DP3SP)
Item/Description
Instructions
Ratee Did/Did Not Submit
Place an “X” in the appropriate box.
220 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Comments
I Do/Do Not Concur With
Assessment
Place an “X” in the appropriate box.
Comments Area
Insert comments for non-concurrence only.
Name, Grade, Branch of
Service, Organization,
Command, Location
Enter evaluator identification as of close-out.
See Note 3.
Duty Title
Enter the duty title as of the close-out date.
Date
Date may be handwritten, typed or stamped. Do not date before
close-out date.
Social Security Number
Enter only the last four of the evaluator’s social security number
Signature
Wet sign in reproducible blue or black ink. Do not sign before
the close-out date.
SECTION X. ACQUISTION OR FUNCTIONAL EXAMINER/AIR FORCE OR SPACE
FORCE ADVISOR REVIEW (Used only as applicable)
Item/Description
Instructions
Acquisition Examiner
Place an “X” in the applicable box.
Functional Examiner
Place an “X” in the applicable box.
Air Force or Space Force
Advisor
See Note 4.
Name, Grade, Branch of
Service, Organization,
Command, Location
Enter evaluator identification as of close-out. See Note 3.
Signature
Digitally Sign. If digital capability is unavailable or if LOE is a
referral, wet sign in reproducible blue or black ink. Do not sign
before the close-out date.
Date
Digital signatures will auto-date form. If not available or
referral handwrite, type or stamp. Do not date before close-out
date.
Notes:
1. Grade Data. Use the information below to determine the appropriate grade entry. For:
a. Officers. Enter the active duty grade in which serving on the close-out date. If the ratee has
been frocked, enter actual grade, not the grade the member is wearing.
b. Non-Extended Active Duty ANG and AFR Officers. Enter grade in which serving and “Non-
Extended Active Duty.” When an officer awaiting federal recognition of a unit vacancy
promotion to a higher grade is due an evaluation, show the officer's federally recognized grade
as of the close-out date of the evaluation, not the projected grade.
c. All Active Guard Reserve (AGR) on Extended Active Duty under 10 U.S.C. §§ 10211,
10305, 12310, 12402 or 32 U.S.C. § 708. Enter grade in which serving and “AGR”.
LEAD officers on Extended Active Duty under 10 U.S.C. § 12301(d), enter grade in which
serving and “LEAD”.
2. FROM and THRU Dates. Use the criteria below to establish the correct date to use:
a. On all LOEs, the FROM date is the first day of supervision or observation; the
day following the close-out of the last evaluation or TR whichever is later; or if there is not
previous evaluation, the extended active duty or total active federal military service date.
b. On informal LOEs, the THRU date is the last day of supervision or observation.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 221
c. On formal LOEs, the THRU date is the day before the effective date (departure date) of the
PCS, PCA, temporary duty action, or the day before the commander’s written notice of a
planned separation in accordance with DAFI 36-3211.
3. Signatures and Dates.
a. Sign and date the original form. Do not sign or date before the close-out date. Enter only the
last four digits of the evaluator’s social security number. If the evaluator is a civilian or a
member of a foreign service, the social security number is not required.
b. Upon Senate confirmation, colonels on the brigadier general select list are permitted to sign
all Officer Evaluation System forms as “Brig Gen (Sel)” provided they are either designated by
their respective management level as a senior rater or they are assigned to an authorized, funded
or unfunded, brigadier general officer position, frocked or not.
c. Upon Senate confirmation, brigadier generals on the major general select list are permitted to
sign all Officer Evaluation System forms as “Maj Gen (Sel)” provided that they are either
evaluating other general officers or are assigned to an authorized, funded or unfunded, major
general officer position, frocked or not.
d. Upon Senate confirmation, all general officer selects, assigned to joint billets or unified
commands, may sign all Officer Evaluation System forms as “NAME, Brig Gen (Sel), USAF”.
e. Any LOE closing out prior to the senate confirmation date will not reflect the “Select (Sel)”
and, if necessary, be forwarded up the chain for endorsement. In addition, all frocked general
officers are authorized to sign all Officer Evaluation System forms in their frocked grade
without designating their frocked status (e.g., major general vice major general “frocked”).
4. The examiner/advisor may provide clarification about the ratee's duty performance, elaborate
on types of functions ratee performs (advisor), or clarify acquisition-related considerations
(examiner), and explain any uncommon phrases or terms. Limit comments to the space
provided. See paragraph 1.6.8 to determine when an acquisition/functional examiner/AF or SF
advisor is required.
5. Gaps and Unrated Periods between Evaluations. See DAFI 36-2608.
a. Documenting Unrated Periods between Officer Evaluations. Complete an DAF Form 77 with
the inclusive dates of the unrated period. Enter the statement “Prior-service enlistee (or officer)
not rated for the above period,” in Section IV of the DAF Form 77. When an officer enters the
Air Force or Space Force from another service, prepare a DAF Form 77 to cover the period
between the close-out date of the officer’s last performance evaluation in the other service and
the date of entry into the Air Force or Space Force. The servicing MPF prepares the DAF Form
77 and forwards a copy to the custodian of the SNCO selection record, Officer Command
Selection Record Group (OCSRG), OSR, and ARMS and PRDA. The servicing MPF informs
the officer of the preparation and filing of the DAF Form 77. Responsibility for the preparation
of the DAF Form 77 is as follows:
(1) ARPC for individuals recalled under 10 U.S.C. §§ 10301, 10211, 12301(d), 12310, 10305,
8038 and 12402; US Property and Fiscal Officers recalls under 32 U.S.C. § 708; and recalls to
serve with the Selective Service.
(2) The losing ARC MPF, if assigned to nonparticipating status:
(a) For Reservists. ARPC/DPTSE documents voids in records for periods of service for officers
assigned to a reserve section, voids caused by a Guard officer moving from one state to another,
and voids caused when a member's federal recognition date is not the day following the close-
out of their last officer evaluation.
(b) For unit recalls, the servicing MPF or CSS prepares the DAF Form 77.
222 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
b. For Individuals with Prior Service with Previous Evaluations. When the ratee, including an
enlistee with prior service, has previous performance evaluations on file but has gaps in ratings
due to the breaks in military service, the FROM date becomes the day after the close-out date of
the last evaluation prepared. Enter the statement “Prior-service enlistee (or officer) not rated for
the above period” in Section IV of the DAF Form 77. For the THRU date:
(1) Update the day before the extended active duty date in the system for active duty personnel.
(2) Update the day before the assignment begins in the system for non-active duty SrA and
above.
(3) For enlisted members, project the annual evaluation one year from their extended active
duty date, unless the ratee does not have at least 20 months total active federal military service
on the extended active duty date; in this case, close out the evaluation when the ratee completes
20 months total active federal military service as an initial evaluation. Exception: A DBH
evaluation is required for promotion consideration. For ARC, less than 20 months date initial
entry uniformed services.
(4) For officers, project the annual evaluation one year from their extended active duty date.
Exception: A DBH evaluation is required for promotion consideration.
c. For individuals with prior service, but no earlier evaluations. When an individual with prior
service has no evaluations reports on file, the period of the DAF Form 77 begins with the ratee’s
total active federal military service date (Enlisted) or extended active duty date (Officers) and
closes out the DAF Form 77 one day before the reentry to extended active duty which is
reflected in the system.
(1) Enter the statement “Prior-service enlistee (or officer) not rated for the above period,” in
Section IV of the DAF Form 77.
(2) For enlisted members, update the system with rating code “PB” (Not rated (break in
service)) and the close-out date. For officers, forward the DAF Form 77 to the Master Personnel
Record Group custodian, for routing and distribution.
(3) For enlisted members, project the evaluation to the next static close-out date unless the ratee
does not have at least 20 months total active federal military service on the extended active duty
date; in this case, close-out the evaluation when the ratee completes 20 months total active
federal military service, as an initial evaluation.
(4) For officers, project the annual evaluation one year from their extended active duty date.
Exception: A DBH evaluation is required for promotion consideration.
d. Restored to Regular Active Duty. A release from active duty that has been voided by the
Board for Correction of Military Records and the ratee has been ordered back to active duty.
AFPC/DPMSP will prepare the DAF Form 77. Enter the statement: “No evaluation available
for the period (date) through (date). Officer restored to regular active duty by direction of the
Secretary of the Air Force,” in Section IV of the DAF Form 77.
e. Lost Time, Confinement or Prisoner Status, or Appellate Leave. To document extended
periods of lost time, including military and/or civilian confinement, prisoner status and appellate
leave, the member’s servicing MPF or CSS will prepare the DAF Form 77. Enter the statement:
“No evaluation available for the period (date) through (date). No evaluation required in
accordance with DAFI 36-2406,” in Section IV of the DAF Form 77.
f. Hospitalizations/Convalescent and/or Casual/Patient Status. To document unrated periods on
individuals who are in full-time student (functional category “L”) or, hospitalizations, periods of
convalescent and/or casual/patient status, enter the statement: “No evaluation available for the
period (date) through (date). No evaluation required in accordance with DAFI 36-2406,” in
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 223
Section IV of the DAF Form 77.
g. Educational Leave of Absences. To document unrated periods on individuals who are on an
educational leave of absences (e.g., Bootstrap and/or educational leave to a civilian institution),
the period will be from the time the individual started the educational program through when the
member returned to the unit (subtracting any ordinary leave). Section II A will have marked
"Supplemental Sheet." No other areas will be marked on the DAF Form 77. The DAF Form 77
will be signed ("wet") by no lower than the unit commander of the members' assigned unit.
Enter the statement: “Educational Leave of Absence from (date) through (date). No evaluation
required in accordance with DAFI 36-2406” in Section IV of the DAF Form 77. The next
evaluation period will start the day after the thru date on the DAF Form 77.
h. Temporary Disability Retired List. To document an unrated period when the ratee was on the
Temporary Disability Retired List; then removed and returned to active duty (Temporary
Disability Retired List removal and return to active duty is prepared by AFPC/DPSDD) enter the
statement: "No evaluation for the period (date) through (date). Officer not rated due to
placement on the Temporary Disability Retired List," in Section IV of the DAF Form 77.
i. AFBCMR Directed. Board actions taken by the AFBCMR under DAFI 36-2603, will enter
the statement: "Not rated for the above period. Evaluation removed by the order of the
SecAF,” in Section IV of the DAF Form 77.
j. ERAB Directed. Board actions taken by the ERAB in accordance with Chapter 10 will enter
the statement: (USAF) "Not rated for the above period. Evaluation removed by order of the
Chief of Staff, USAF," in Section IV of the DAF Form 77; (USSF) “Not rated for the above
period. Evaluation removed by order of the Chief of Space Operations, USSF,” in Section IV of
the DAF Form 77.
k. Lost and/or Missing Evaluations. See paragraph 1.14 for procedures. For lost and/or
missing evaluations in which all actions to find/recover have failed, use the DAF Form 77 as a
substitute for a missing evaluation. Complete the name, social security number, and grade
blocks in section I. Mark the “Supplemental Sheet” block and complete the FROM and THRU
blocks in section II. Enter the statement: “No evaluation available for the period (date) through
(date) for administrative reasons which were not the fault of the member. The system [reflects
an overall rating of “X”]/ [does not reflect an overall rating] in Section IV of the DAF Form 77.
6. When an DAF Form 77 is used for other than performance evaluations, the HR specialist
enters their information in the signature block and signs in Section IV.
224 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Table 5.2. When to submit a Letter of Evaluation.
R
U
L
E
When to Prepare a Letter of
Evaluation
Type
File in
MPerRGp
Yes/No
Mandatory
Optional
1
Deployed Commander Letter of
Evaluation. See Note 1.
Formal
Yes
X
2
Separation. See Note 3.
Formal
Yes
X
3
Change of Reporting Official
(CRO) due to the PCS/PCA of the
ratee or rater; and the ratee is an
active duty A1C/Spc3 or below,
with less than 20 months Total
Active Federal Military Service,
or an AFR SrA or below with less
than 20 months from Date Initial
Entry Uniformed Services. Only
16 months for those airmen or
guardians who enlisted under the
National Call to Service program.
See Notes 2 and 6.
Informal
(not filed in the
permanent
record)
No
X
4
Officer - CRO due to the
PCS/PCA of the ratee or rater
with any days of supervision. See
Note 2.
Enlisted - CRO due to the
PCS/PCA of the ratee or rater
with any days of supervision.
No
X
5
Enlisted AFR personnel when the
rater departs PCS.
No
X
6
RegAF or USSF officer and
enlisted personnel when deployed
in support of contingency
operations. See Note 2.
No
X
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 225
7
ANG personnel when deployed in
support of contingency
operations.
No
X
8
Supplemental Letter of
Evaluation. See Note 4.
Supplemental
Yes
X
9
Administrative Letter of
Evaluation. See Note 5.
Administrative
Yes
X
10
All Other Letters of Evaluation,
(Lt Col and below), not covered
above are optional; however, they
are highly recommended
Informal (not
filed in the
permanent
record)
No
X
Notes:
1. Deployed Commander LOE. Prepare for officers (in the grade of colonel and below) deployed
in support of contingency operations to fill detachment, squadron, group, delta, and wing
commander requirements. Tour length of deployment to fill commander requirement must be 45
calendar days or more. If a commander is forward deployed to fill another commander
requirement at a different location, they may receive more than one LOE provided the minimum
45 calendar day requirement is met at each location. The commander must be designated on G-
Series orders. Exception: Commanders filling 365-day extended deployment billets will have an
officer evaluation accomplished if: (RegAF and ARC only) deployed at the commander’s
respective SCOD; or, (USSF only) an evaluation becomes due while deployed.
2. Supervision Requirements. A minimum of 60 calendar days and not more than 120 calendar
days supervision is required. Deployed personnel not covered in Rule 1, or deployed personnel
not filling a 365-day extended deployment, require a minimum of 60 calendar days supervision.
However, supervision may be greater than 120 calendar days, depending on how long the member
is deployed and/or extended. The close-out date will be one day prior to the member’s departure
date.
3. Prepare when required by DAFI 36-3211.
4. Supplemental LOEs are required to be attached to the document they are supplementing and
will be filed in the Master Personnel Record Group with that document.
5. Administrative LOEs are filed in the Master Personnel Record Group for informational
purposes, to explain gaps in records, missing evaluations, breaks in service, etc.
6. If the ratee has less than 20 months total active federal military service and comments in the
LOE are referral in nature, only an informal LOE is authorized. The comments from this LOE
may be included in the ratee’s initial evaluation.
226 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Chapter 6
AF FORM 475, EDUCATION/TRAINING REPORT
6.1. When to Use Training Reports (TR).
6.1.1. Submissions are mandatory (See Table 6.2.):
6.1.1.1. Upon completion or interruption of, or elimination from formal training or
education when the scheduled course length is eight weeks or more or as authorized in this
chapter when the specific course is less than eight weeks (Chaplain or Medical Programs,
Squadron Officer School, and Commissioned Officer Training); AFR Air Reserve
Technicians (ART) and ANG Military Technicians attending formal training or education
in civilian status receive a TR and credit in the civilian evaluation system. Note: Only
training of 20 weeks or more will be updated in MilPDS and restart the next evaluation
inclusive dates. (T-3)
6.1.1.1.1. If the interruption or elimination from training was of no fault of the officer,
a TR will be completed if the officer was enrolled in training for 10 duty days or more
to document performance. If the officer was enrolled in training for 9 duty days or less,
a TR is not required. However, a memorandum for record will be produced by the
training squadron commander stating the interruption or elimination was of no fault of
the officer and they are eligible to attend the training, provided they continue to meet
the requirements.
6.1.1.1.2. If the officer is at fault regarding the interruption or elimination from
training, a TR is required regardless of length of time enrolled in training.
6.1.1.2. Enlisted. AF Form 475s are not authorized for enlisted members.
6.1.1.3. For self-paced courses, when the prescribed course length is eight weeks or more,
regardless of the time actually required to complete the course.
6.1.1.4. At the end of each academic year, unless the course completion date is within four
months of the annual TR. The academic year for officers attending law school under
Funded Legal Education Program or the Excess Leave Program ends after the officer's
summer internship training.
6.1.1.5. For personnel participating in the World Class Athlete Program, one year from
beginning training, then annually until training is completed or member is eliminated from
training.
6.1.1.6. Reserve Chaplain Candidates. At the end of each active duty training tour of 10
days or more and processed as prescribed by AFRC.
6.1.1.7. Member is assigned to a full-time degree program through the Air Force Institute
of Technology. Requirements are the same as in effect for officers in attendance. The rater
on the TR is designated by the commandant of each Department of the Air Force school or
the detachment commander. The designee must serve in a grade equal to or higher than
the ratee.
6.1.1.8. Interrogator Duty Training. Members fulfilling these requirements must complete
six months of training with the US Army prior to departing for the actual deployment.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 227
Therefore, students attending Interrogator Training are administratively assigned to the
314th Training Squadron, Fort Huachuca, for the 23-week program. These evaluations
will be updated in MilPDS.
6.1.2. Submission for Advanced Academic Degree Subsequent Completion.
6.1.2.1. Upon completion of advanced academic degrees, a member who left full-time
student status prior to completing thesis or dissertation degree requirements may request
to have a TR filed in his or her record. Member must meet the following eligibility criteria
to reflect degree completion:
6.1.2.1.1. The member was assigned to a full-time degree program through the Air
Force Institute of Technology. (T-3)
6.1.2.1.2. The member completed all but the thesis or dissertation portion of the degree
program. (T-3)
6.1.2.1.3. The member has a previous AF Form 475 in the Master Personnel Record
Group that clearly identifies the reason for non-completion as," Thesis or dissertation
not completed during an Air Force Institute of Technology tour," in accordance with
Table 6.1. (T-3)
6.1.2.1.4. The member completed the degree requirements of the Air Force Institute of
Technology program in which they were originally enrolled. (T-3)
6.1.2.1.5. The officer documented degree completion through Air Force Institute of
Technology (AFIT) channels (verified via a MilPDS inquiry). (T-3)
6.1.2.2. The member who meets the above criteria is responsible for submitting an official
transcript to AFIT/RRE requesting completion of a TR.
6.1.3. Directed Submission. When directed by HAF or HSF, for courses 8 weeks or longer.
6.1.4. AFIT Master’s Degree Students and Other Long School Students. Students will receive
one final TR upon completion of a course 18 months or less. Exception: Above the
promotion zone students will receive DBH TRs (as required) for their applicable central
selection boards. AFIT PhD students will receive a mid-course and final training report. If a
student is disenrolled for unsatisfactory progress or eliminated/withdrawn for other reasons, a
TR is rendered when the member is reassigned. In addition, consider DBC referral TRs if a
student does not meet standards in an area other than training progress.
6.1.5. Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve.
6.1.5.1. Students completing initial skills training courses will not receive a TR. It is a
total force policy, and the same consistent rules apply.
6.1.5.2. Students completing training (not initial training) courses 20 weeks or longer in
duration will receive a TR.
6.1.5.3. Students taking advanced or supplemental courses longer than 20 weeks will
receive a TR.
6.1.5.4. There are no special or unique distribution instructions for Guard or Reserve
members on TRs. The same procedures used to process performance evaluations will be
used to process TRs.
228 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
6.2. Who Prepares Training Reports.
6.2.1. The officer designated by the commandant of each Department of the Air Force school
or the commander of each Air Reserve squadron. The designee must be serving in a grade
equal to or higher than the ratee, except for TRs submitted under paragraph 6.2.2. (T-1)
6.2.2. In exceptional cases, the student's commander and a military training institution may
mutually agree on an evaluator (civilian or military) not under the jurisdiction of the unit of
assignment. An official of a civilian institution will not sign or submit a TR. (T-1)
6.2.3. The education services officer may complete a TR only when they are the rater.
6.2.4. AFIT personnel prepare TRs for officers under the Funded Legal Education Program or
Excess Leave Program. The staff judge advocate of the student’s assigned unit for internship
training may prepare an optional LOE and submit it to AFIT at the end of each summer
internship.
6.2.5. Graduate School of Engineering and Management, AFIT, prepares TRs for officers
participating in the PhD. program during both the academic and the research phases. During
the research phase, sponsoring laboratory and research facility personnel may prepare an
optional LOE and submit it to AFIT.
6.2.6. AFIT standardizes TRs that document completion of advanced academic degrees
received after leaving AFIT full-time student status, if all the criteria listed in paragraph 6.2.2
are met.
6.2.7. AFIT personnel prepare TRs on officers in graduate level study programs that are 26
weeks or longer. The evaluator may communicate directly with the institution to obtain the
information required to prepare the evaluation. See Table 6.1 for recording adverse actions.
6.2.8. Commissioned Officer Training School personnel prepare TRs for officers who
complete Commissioned Officer Training School.
6.2.9. The Headquarters Air Force Services Agency Commander prepares TRs on members
participating in the World Class Athlete Program.
6.3. Referral Training Reports. See paragraph 1.10.6.4.
6.4. Routing and Responsibilities.
6.4.1. For officers attending school in TDY status:
6.4.1.1. The school prepares the TR, performs a quality review, and makes distribution as
follows:
6.4.1.1.1. Forward the original to AFPC/DPMSPE (ADL) or ARPC/DPMSPE
(Reserve Active Status List [RASL]), who files the TR into the Master Personnel
Record Group and updates MilPDS. For judge advocates (lieutenant colonel and
below), forward a copy of the TR to HAF/JAX.
6.4.1.2. TRs on extended active duty officers are due to AFPC 60 calendar days after
evaluation close-out date. (T-2) AGR and LEAD officers’ evaluations are due to
ARPC/DPTSE 60 calendar days after the close-out date. (T-2)
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 229
6.4.1.3. TRs on non-extended active duty officers are due to ARPC/DPTSE 60 calendar
days after evaluation close-out date. (T-2)
6.4.2. For officers attending school in PCS status:
6.4.2.1. The school prepares the TR and forwards the original to AFPC/DPMSPE, ATTN:
Evaluations Operations, 550 C Street West, Joint Base San Antonio, TX 78150.
6.4.2.2. TRs are due to AFPC 60 calendar days after evaluation close-out date (120
calendar days for AFIT/civilian institution programs).
6.4.3. For non-extended active ANG officers, send TRs to the servicing MPF for quality
review, adding of opening dates and AFSCs. The MPF will distribute the completed original
TR to ARPC/DPTSE and copies to the OCSRG and State Adjutant General not later than 60
calendar days after close-out date.
6.4.4. AFIT/RRE will forward the completed TR that documents subsequent completion of an
advanced academic degree to all appropriate agencies for filing in the Master Personnel Record
Group. The TR will be filed based on the signature date of the AF Form 475, not with the
original AF Form 475 that indicated non completion of the advanced academic degree.
Table 6.1. Instructions for Completing AF Form 475, Training Report (Officers Only).
Note: Air Force terminology applies to the Space Force equivalent (e.g., Airman applies to
Guardian, Air Force Specialty Code applies to Space Force Specialty Code, etc.)
SECTION I. Identification Data (See Notes 1 and 2)
I
T
E
M
A
B
Item
To Complete
Instructions
1
Name
Enter Last Name, First Name Middle Initial, and Jr., Sr., etc. Use
of “NMI” when there is no middle initial is not mandatory. The
name will be in all upper case.
2
Social Security
Number
Enter social security number.
3
Grade
Select grade
4
Duty Air Force
Specialty Code
(AFSC)
Enter Duty Air Force Specialty Code held as of the THRU date of
the TR. Include prefix and suffix.
5
Organization,
Command, and
Location
Enter organization data. For Squadron Officer School students and
Officer Training Students enter the organizational data for
Squadron Officer School and Officer Training School.
6
Period of Report
See Table 6.2.
230 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
7
Length of Course
For all formal training or education, enter number of weeks
(rounded down to the nearest whole week and followed by the
word “weeks”) of the scheduled training or education. Use
scheduled length of training even if the officer completes a self-
paced course early, course completion is delayed, the officer is
temporarily held beyond the actual course/training completion
date, or the officer is eliminated from training (see Note 3 and
Note 9).
8
Reason for Report
Place an “X” in the appropriate box (see Note 4).
9
Name and Location of
School or Institution
Enter required information (see Note 5).
10
Name or Title of
Course
Enter title of major subject or problems presented or discussed.
SECTION II. Report Data
I
T
E
M
A
Item
To Complete
B
Instructions
Evaluation Report
Data
Complete only the applicable items in this section; leave non-
applicable items blank.
1
AFSC/Aero
Rating/Degree
Awarded
Enter AFSC, aeronautical rating, or degree awarded.
2
Completion
Place an “X” in the box, if applicable.
3
Distinguished
Graduate (DG)
Place an “X,” if appropriate, in the "Yes" or "No DG Program"
block on final TR. Leave item blank if DG program exists and
ratee did not receive such a designation.
4
DG Award
Criteria/Course Non-
completion Reason
Enter DG Award Criteria or Course Non-completion Reason. For
a student designated as a DG in item 3, provide the criteria
(Example: Top 10 percent of class or grade point average above
3.5) (see Note 6.)
SECTION III. Comments
I
T
E
M
A
B
Item To Complete
Instructions
1
Academic Training
Accomplishments
Do include comments if the ratee received recognition for specific
or above average achievement, such as designation as a DG. Do
not make promotion/developmental education recommendations
(see Notes 7 and 8).
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 231
2
Professional Qualities
Comments are mandatory concerning general attitude, military
bearing, appearance, conduct, and fitness. When an evaluator
cannot observe professional qualities due to geographic separation
(e.g., civilian institution AFIT students), include the statement,
"Ratee is geographically separated from evaluator," in the
“Professional Qualities” block of section III. Do not make
promotion/developmental education recommendations (see Notes
7 and 8).
3
Other Comments
Section may be used to clearly identify uncommon acronyms or
other information outside the training environment (e.g.,
performance during the inclusive periods).
SECTION IV - Evaluator
I
T
E
M
A
B
Item To Complete
Instructions
1
Evaluator Data
Enter information required and command of assignment for
evaluator in the spaces provided. Sign the original (copies: sign,
initial, or stamp SIGNED). Do not sign or date an evaluation
before the close-out date. The grade and duty title must coincide
with those held on the close-out date of the evaluation. Enter only
the last four digits of the social security number. If the evaluator is
a civilian or a member of a foreign service, the social security
number is not required.
232 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Notes:
1. See TR notice for ratee identification data. If any data is incorrect, notify the MPF or
CSS/HR specialist for correction.
2. See Table 6.2 for FROM and THRU areas.
3. For AFR selective service officers attending a National Security Seminar, leave blank.
4. Use the following guidelines in determining the reason for the TR:
a. Final. On completion of, interruption by official orders of, or elimination for any reason from
scheduled course/training program, or when released by the training organization.
b. Annual. At the end of each academic year, except for final year, for officers in extended
programs. When the graduation date is within four calendar months of the annual evaluation,
submit a final TR in place of the annual TR.
c. Directed. When directed by HAF or HSF or an appropriate commander for extended active
duty officers or AFR officers not on extended active duty, or NGB for ANG officers not on
extended active duty. TRs will reflect "Directed."
5. For AFR officers in selective service performing their annual active duty tour for training
through attendance at a National Security Seminar, enter "National Security Seminar" and
location.
6. If the student has failed to complete the course of training, use one of the following phrases
and indicate whether the elimination was due to factors over which the student did or did not
have control (if derogatory comments are used, the TR must be referred):
a. Withdrawn without prejudice for the needs of the Air Force or Space Force (only used for
those in training for 10 duty days (or more) and training was interrupted or the officer was
eliminated due to no fault of their own).
b. Withdrawn for humanitarian reasons (only used for those in training for 10 duty days (or
more) and training was interrupted or the officer was eliminated due to no fault of their own).
c. Eliminated for academic deficiency.
d. Eliminated for flying deficiency.
e. Eliminated for physical reasons.
f. Eliminated for fear of flying.
g. Eliminated for manifestation of apprehension.
h. Eliminated for instructor non-adaptability.
i. Eliminated for skill or aptitude deficiency.
j. Voluntary self-elimination.
k. Physical fitness failure.
l. Thesis or dissertation not completed during AFIT tour.
m. If none of the above reasons apply, state the reason. To explain further, also enter "See
Comments," and explain in the appropriate comment section.
7. The following entries are mandatory when applicable:
a. Comments regarding court-martial convictions.
b. Comments regarding elimination or interruption of training by official orders, citing specific
reason when possible.
c. Comments mandatory for AFR selective service officers: enter "Officer is attending this
section of National Security Seminar as their annual short tour." Note: Although not
mandatory for inclusion, evaluators are strongly encouraged to consider making comments on
TRs regarding adverse actions such as Article 15s, letters of reprimand, admonishment or
counseling, or control roster action.
8. Comments are standardized on TRs prepared by AFIT/RRE.
9. Hold evaluations for students who complete a course early (Example: Self-paced course)
until the course supervisor determines whether the student is a distinguished or outstanding
graduate. The THRU date on the TR is the date the officer completes the course, not the date the
school determines the officer is a distinguished or outstanding graduate.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 233
Table 6.2. When to Prepare AF Form 475, Training Report (T-1).
R
U
L
E
A
B
C
If the member is attending
and education or training is
then the
information
management
tool (IMT) is
1
A degree granting academic education
program through AFIT.
any length.
See Notes 1 and 2.
filed in Officer
Command
Selection
Record
(OCSRG),
Senior
Noncommissio
ned Selection
Record Group
(NSRG) and
Master
Personnel
Record Group
(MPerRGp).
See Note 3
2
Developmental Education, In-
Residence:
(Air Force) Primary Developmental
Education (PDE), Intermediate
Developmental Education (IDE), Senior
Developmental Education (SDE)
(Space Force) Primary Level Education
(PLE), Intermediate Level Education
(ILE), Senior Level Education (SLE)
8 weeks or more, but less than
20 weeks. See Note 4.
3
20 weeks or more. See Note 1.
4
The National Security Seminar for all
selective service AFR officers not on
extended active duty, (AFR Officers
only).
5
A course or series of courses considered
initial training in a utilization field. See
Note 6.
8 weeks or more, but less than
20 weeks. See Notes 4 and 8.
6
20 weeks or more. See Notes 1
and 8.
7
A direct commissioning program, such
as Commissioned Officer Training. See
Note 6.
8 weeks or less
8
The World Class Athlete Program. See
Note 11.
any length. See Note 1.
9
The Air Force Intern Program. See
Note 7.
20 weeks or more. See Note 1.
10
The Reserve Chaplains Program, (AFR
Officers only).
10 days or more. See Note 8.
filed in the
OSR at ARPC/
234 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
11
The Chaplain Candidate Program, (AFR
Officers only).
active duty tour of 10 days or
more. See Notes 1 and 9.
DPTS
12
8 weeks or less
13
Training or education not covered
above. See Note 10.
8 weeks or more but less Than
20 weeks. See Notes 4 and 8
filed in
OCSRG,
NSRG and
MPerRGp.
See Note 3
14
20 weeks or more. See Notes 1
and 8.
15
Interrogator Duty Training.
23 weeks or more. See Note
12.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 235
Notes:
1. TRs prepared under this rule begin the day following the THRU date of the student’s last
officer evaluation or TR unless it is an initial TR. For initial TRs, the FROM date is: the date
of officer’s entry on extended active duty or start of the current AGR/LEAD assignment; or the
date of the first federally recognized appointment for ANG students not on extended active duty;
or for AFR students not on extended active duty, the date of the last assignment to the Ready
Reserve position presently held. The THRU date is the date the training or course ends or when
the officer is released by the training organization. Example: A student has an officer
evaluation that closed out on 1 July 2023 and attends a course beginning on 6 August 2023. The
course graduated on 5 August 2024. The period of evaluation should be 2 July 2023 to 5 August
2024. In the event the officer remains in casual status with the training organization, the period
of the evaluation will be to the date the officer is released. AFR Air Reserve Technicians (ART)
and ANG Military Technicians attending formal training or education in civilian status receive
TRs and credit in the civilian evaluation system. Note: For course lengths, refer to the Air
Force Education and Training Course Announcements at site https://usaf.dps.mil/teams/app10-
etca/sitepages/home.aspx, or other appropriate directive.
2. Do not accomplish TRs on students in the Education Leave of Absence Program in TDY
status unless course length is 26 weeks or more.
3. The OCSRG is not maintained on lieutenants or non-promotion eligible captains on the ADL.
4. TRs prepared under this rule cover a period independent of the ratee’s officer evaluation
period. Therefore, it is not necessary to prepare an officer evaluation solely because the officer
is going to school. Use the following period of report: FROM date is the course start date; and
the THRU date is the date of completion, interruption, or elimination from formal training or
education training. Example: A ratee had an officer evaluation that closed out on 1 Nov 2023
and attends a course from 1 January 2024 to 1 Apr 2024. The AF Form 475 covers the period
from 1 January 2024 to 1 Apr 2024. The ratee’s next officer evaluation will have a FROM date
of 2 November 2023 and the time the officer is absent will be subtracted from the period of
supervision on the next officer evaluation. AFR Air Reserve Technicians and ANG Military
Technicians attending formal training or education in civilian status receive TRs and credit in the
civilian evaluation system. Note: For course lengths, refer to the Air Force Education and
Training Course Announcements at site https://usaf.dps.mil/teams/app10-
etca/sitepages/home.aspx, or other appropriate directive.
236 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
5. Includes Undergraduate Pilot Training, Student Undergraduate Pilot Training, Undergraduate
Navigator Training, and Student Undergraduate Navigator Training, Undergraduate Space and
Missile Training, Aircraft Maintenance Officer Course and other entry-level courses (as
determined by the MAJCOM or FLDCOM). Officials at MAJCOM or FLDCOM HQs and HAF
or HSF are responsible for the course content and curriculum and determine if the course is
initial qualification. Note: Officers in the second year of AF/XO-sponsored Nuclear
Technology Fellows Program, working in their primary specialty, and health profession officers
who are in-utilization training for one year or more will have an officer evaluation versus a TR.
AF/XO and AF/SG will determine the rating chain for the identified officers and in coordination
with AFPC/DP3SP, will determine which positions will be designated senior rater for these
officers. These nuclear technology fellows and health profession officers still remain students in
training status. This guidance affects officer evaluations only; (RegAF and ARC only) it has no
impact on the requirement for narrative only PRFs for the officers in training.
6. This training applies to judge advocates, chaplains, and medical officers.
7. Annual, Directed, and Final TRs, as appropriate, will be prepared at the end of each training
phase.
a. Annual TRs will be prepared by the sponsoring organization for interns in Phase IIIA; they
will close-out on 30 Jun.
b. Directed TRs will be prepared by the sponsoring organization for interns in Phase IIIB who
opt to complete a master’s degree or elect a third rotation; TRs will cover the period 1 Jul to 31
Dec.
c. Final TRs will be prepared by the sponsoring organization for interns who opt for a post-
training assignment upon completion of Phase IIIB or who opt for and complete a third rotation.
8. For self-paced formal Air Force or Space Force training courses when the prescribed course
length is eight weeks or more, regardless of the time actually required to complete the course.
9. AF Form 475 on chaplain candidates are prepared and processed as prescribed by ARPC.
ARPC/DPTSE will file chaplain AF Forms 475 in the selection folder.
10. This is generally training designed to upgrade or enhance an officer's qualification in a
utilization field. Includes initial qualification in a weapon system for officers qualified in that
utilization field. Example: Pilots undergoing initial F-15 training would be evaluated under
this rule.
11. For members participating in the World Class Athlete Program, one year from beginning
training, then annually until training is completed or member is eliminated from training.
12. Members fulfilling these requirements must complete six months of training with the US
Army prior to departing for the actual deployment. Therefore, students attending Interrogator
Training are administratively assigned to the 314th Training Squadron, Fort Huachuca, for the
23-week program. These evaluations will be updated in MilPDS.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 237
Chapter 7
GENERAL OFFICER EVALUATIONS
7.1. Overview. This chapter covers procedures for completing DAF Form 78, Department of the
Air Force General Officer Promotion Recommendation. It applies to all RegAF, Space Force, and
Reserve brigadier generals and major generals, (to include selects) except State Adjutant Generals.
7.2. Forms Used.
7.2.1. For brigadier and major generals (to include Senate confirmed selects and frocked), use
DAF Form 78. See Table 7.1.
7.2.2. Use DAF Form 77 to document performance and potential and to provide that
information to the management level. See Table 7.2. It is also used to document performance
of general officers/selectees who are serving in a TDY status for more than 60 but less than
179 calendar days. General officers/selectees that are serving in a TDY status for more than
180 calendar days receive an DAF Form 78. See Table 7.1.
7.3. Reasons for Reports.
7.3.1. Annual Reports. Brigadier general (including Senate confirmed selects) reports close-
out 31 July; non extended active-duty brigadier general (including Senate confirmed selects)
reports close-out 31 May.
7.3.2. Change of Reporting Official Reports (CRO). In the event a CRO occurs, and there are
at least 60 calendar days of supervision, a CRO report is optional if the CRO occurs outside
60 calendar days from the annual requirement with the approval of AF/A1LG or SF/S1L
(AF/REG for non-extended active duty officers). A CRO is any close-out date other than the
SCOD (31 July for brigadier generals and Senate confirmed selects.
7.3.3. Directed by HAF or HSF Reports. AF/A1LG or SF/S1L (AF/REG for non-extended
active duty officers) may direct general officer (GO) reports at any time, regardless of the days
of supervision.
7.3.4. Directed by NGB Reports. NGB-GO may direct GO reports at any time, regardless of
the days of supervision.
7.3.5. Officers Selected and Confirmed for Brigadier General. This report covers the period
of supervision since the member’s last report as a colonel and transitions the member to the
brigadier general annual report cycle. Use the Colonel SCOD when the selected member’s
report is due prior to Senate confirmation and prior to the brigadier general SCOD. This report
will count for the entire calendar year. See paragraph 7.4.8 for further details.
7.4. General Instructions.
7.4.1. Who receives reports. Brigadier generals (including Senate confirmed selects) will
receive at least one DAF Form 78 per calendar year. (T-1) If a CRO occurs between January
and the general officer SCOD (31 July for brigadier generals and Senate confirmed selects)
coordinate with AF/A1LG or SF/S1L to determine appropriate procedures.
238 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
7.4.2. General Officers selected for Major General. Once a GO is selected for promotion to
major general, completion of the report is optional. Remove the GO from the Management
Control Group.
7.4.3. General Officers Who Have Applied for Retirement. If the GO is a brigadier general
and is eligible for promotion consideration to major general and the approved retirement date
is more than 90 calendar days from the promotion board convening date, a report is mandatory.
If the brigadier general is promotion eligible and the approved retirement date is within 90
calendar days of the major general board convening date, remove the GO from the management
control group.
7.4.3.1. Write a report if a GO withdraws their retirement. The report will close-out on
the appropriate current cycle performance report close-out date. (T-1)
7.4.3.2. Make a promotion recommendation on DAF Form 78, block 15, only if the
member withdraws their retirement within 90 calendar days prior to the annual cycle close-
out date.
7.4.4. General officers with dual responsibilities in separate management levels. The ratee's
management level of administrative assignment controls the promotion recommendation (or
evaluation). However, any of the ratees’ supervisors may submit appropriate communications
to the management level for consideration.
7.4.4.1. Use the ratee's duty effective date and the annual cycle close-out date to determine
the management level of administrative assignment.
7.4.4.2. Any member of the ratee's rating chain (in either management level) may submit
appropriate communications to the endorsing official for consideration.
7.4.5. Officers Removed for Cause. Document the reason an officer was removed from duty
for cause in the appropriate annual or CRO report. Contact AF/A1LG or SF/S1L (AF/REG
for non-extended active duty officers, or NGB-GO for Air National Guard of the United States
general officers.
7.4.6. General officers reassigned to a new management level during the evaluation process
(includes command resignations). If the GO is reassigned to a new management level within
60 calendar days before or after the annual cycle close-out date, either the gaining or losing
management level completes the endorser portion (block 16) on the DAF Form 78. Both
management levels must agree on which management level will function as the endorsing
official. (T-1) HAF/A1 and AF/A1LG or SF/S1 and SF/S1L (AF/REG for non-extended active
duty officers) must concur with the decision. (T-1) If a CRO occurs within the period 60 to
90 calendar days before the annual cycle closes out and the ratee changes management levels
during this period, the losing management level completes the CRO report (do not complete
block 15). Follow the directions in the next subparagraphs to determine who completes the
final endorsement and/or promotion recommendation.
7.4.6.1. If the ratee worked directly for the losing management level, then the losing
management level completes blocks 1-15 of the DAF Form 78. The gaining management
level will complete the remaining portion, to include the final endorsement or promotion
recommendation. (T-1)
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 239
7.4.6.2. If the ratee did not work directly for the losing management level, then the losing
rater completes the rater portion of the DAF Form 78 (through block 15) and forwards it
to the losing management level. The losing management level completes a mandatory
DAF Form 77, attaches it to the DAF Form 78 and forwards both forms to the gaining
management level for completion, to include the final endorsement or promotion
recommendation.
7.4.7. General officers reassigned within the current management level during the evaluation
process. If the GO moves within 90 days of the appropriate annual cycle close-out date and
the officer's management level does not change, the rater completes a CRO report (minimum
90 calendar days supervision). This report will serve in place of the annual report. (T-1)
Provide the report to the management level for completion of blocks 15 through 19 (on
promotion-eligible officers) or blocks 16 through 19 (not promotion-eligible). The
management level will complete the report upon the annual cycle close-out date along with
other annual reports on officers in the same control group. (T-1) If a CRO occurs within the
period 60 to 90 calendar days before the annual cycle closes out and the ratee does not change
management levels during this period (e.g., rater departs PCS or ratee changes jobs within
management level, the rater completes a CRO report and the management level holds the report
until the end of the annual cycle. The CRO report will serve as the annual report. (T-1)
7.4.8. Officers Selected and Confirmed for Brigadier General.
7.4.8.1. When promotion to brigadier general is publicly announced by AF/A1LG or
SF/S1L (AF/REG for non-extended active duty officers) as Senate confirmed, prepare an
DAF Form 78.
7.4.8.2. If the member’s last performance report as a colonel closes out before the annual
brigadier general cycle (31 Jul or 31 May for non-extended active duty), the member’s next
performance report will close-out 31 Jul, or 31 May for non-extended active duty, unless a
CRO or DBH report is required. (T-1) The member’s next report will comply with
paragraph 7.3. (T-1)
7.4.8.3. Use an officer ALQ evaluation (RegAF and ARC) or AF Form 707 (USSF) when
the selected member’s evaluation is due prior to Senate confirmation and prior to the
brigadier general SCOD. This report will count for the entire calendar year. (T-1)
7.4.8.4. Forward reports within 30 calendar days of the close-out to: AF/A1LG for
extended active duty officers; NGB-GO for ANG officers; AF/REG for reserve officers;
and S1L for USSF officers.
7.5. Processing General Officer Evaluations. Email all digitally signed GO evaluations to
AF/A1LG or SF/S1L for update in MilPDS and upload into the member’s record in ARMS and
PRDA.
7.5.1. Extended Active Duty Officers Assigned to an Air Force Activity. In activities with a
director of personnel (A1/S1) function (e.g., MAJCOMs/FLDCOMS), the A1/S1 ensures
evaluators complete all reports correctly and forwards them to AF/A1LG or SF/S1L within 30
calendar days of the report close-out date.
240 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
7.5.2. Extended Active Duty Officers Assigned to Air Force Secretariat, Air Staff, or Non-AF
Activities. For activities not serviced by an Air Force A1/S1, AF/A1LG or SF/S1L assists
executive officers with the preparation of the DAF Form 78.
7.5.3. Air Force Reserve General Officers. Send reports to AF/REG within 30 calendar days
of the report close-out date.
7.5.4. Air National Guard General Officers. Send reports to NGB-GO within 30 calendar days
of the report close-out date.
7.5.5. When a Report Becomes a Matter of Record. Once the Chief of Staff, United States
Air Force reviews the report and AF/A1LG accepts the report for file, the report becomes a
matter of record. For the Air National Guard general officers, the report becomes a matter of
record when NGB-GO accepts the report for file. For non-extended active-duty officers, the
report becomes a matter of record when AF/REG accepts the report for file. For Space Force
officers, the report becomes a matter of record once the Chief of Space Operations, United
States Space Force, reviews the report and SF/S1L accepts the report for file.
7.5.6. Release of Reports to Ratees by Reporting, Reviewing, and Endorsing Officials. The
management level should provide a copy of the completed report to the ratee. The rater,
reviewing official or management level (at their discretion) should discuss its contents with
the ratee. Ratees may access copies of their reports via ARMS and PRDA or request copies
from AF/A1LG or SF/S1L. Offices of primary responsibility are NGB-GO for ANG general
officers, or AF/REG for non-Extended Active Duty officers. Advise ratees a report is not
considered a matter of record until it is reviewed by CSAF or CSO (does not apply to ANG
GO or AFR reports) and filed in the selection record.
7.5.7. AF/A1LG and SF/S1L maintains all extended active duty performance reports with
close-out dates on or after 1 February 1991. Note: AF Forms 71, 77, and 78 that closed out
on or before 31 January 1991 are not available for review. They were rendered under an
express promise of confidentiality and are exempt from release under the Freedom of
Information Act and Privacy Act.
Table 7.1. Instructions for Completing DAF Form 78, Department of the Air Force
General Officer Promotion Recommendation.
A
B
C
To Complete
Instructions
Block
Item
1
Name
Self-Explanatory.
2
Social Security
Number
3
Grade
Enter the appropriate grade and include the status if the ratee is a
selectee frocked. For example, Brig Gen (Sel) or Brig Gen.
4
Duty Title
Self-Explanatory.
5
Organization
6
Total Active
Federal Military
Service (TAFSC)
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 241
/Total Federal
Commissioned
Service Date
(TFCSD)/Total
Years’ Service
Date (TYSD)
7
Mandatory
Retirement Date
(MRD)/Mandatory
Separation Date
(MSD)/Date of
Separation
8
Reason
9
Fitness
Check appropriate block regarding member’s most recent,
current fitness assessment. Only mark the exempt block if the
member is exempt from all components of the fitness
assessment.
10
“FROM” Date
Members selected to brigadier general and publicly announced
by AF/A1LG or SF/S1L as confirmed: The report opens on the
day following the close-out of the colonel’s previous report.
Subsequent general officer reports will open the day following
the close-out date of the previous report.
“THRU” Date
Brigadier general reports (includes brigadier general selectees
and those frocked to brigadier general) will close-out 31 July (31
May non-extended active duty) unless a CRO or DBH or NGB
report is necessary.
242 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
11
Rater’s Comments
Comments will be typed in plain language (narrative) format in
Times New Roman, 12 pitch font and limited to 350 characters.
Include comments concerning the ratee's personal and
professional characteristics with emphasis on the ratee's potential
to assume a higher grade or increased responsibilities. Also,
consider ratee’s success in contributing to a healthy
organizational climate, or command climate (if ratee is a
commander). As supporting rationale, identify specific jobs
where the ratee could be used in a higher grade. If not being
recommended for promotion but is being recommended for
further service in the ratee’s current grade, identify options for
future use. If an officer is the subject of a substantiated
allegation, complaint, or investigation, or if the officer was
removed from duty for cause, use this section to address the
issue(s). Do not consider or comment on marital status or the
employment, educational activities, or volunteer service
activities of the ratee’s spouse. As applicable, include comments
on achievements in implementing the recommendations of the
Secretary of Defense's Report to the President on Defense
Management of July 1989.
12
Rater’s ID (name,
grade, and duty
title)
Major general selectees may, once confirmed by the Senate, sign
the DAF Form 78 as a selectee. See Table 7.1 notes. Do not
date or sign prior to the THRU date.
13
Signature
Digital Signature.
14
Date
Date of signature will auto populate.
15a
Promotion
Recommendation
For Brigadier Generals: Block 15a will be completed on all
brigadier general and brigadier general selects. 10 U.S.C § 619,
Eligibility for Consideration for Promotion: Time in Grade and
Other Requirements requires that all officers have at least one
year time in grade to be considered for promotion. If the
brigadier general or brigadier general select will have one year
time-in-grade as of the board convening date mark “ELIGIBLE
FOR PROMOTION THIS CYCLE.” If the brigadier general or
brigadier general select will not have one year time-in-grade as a
brigadier general as of the board convening date mark “NOT
ELIGIBLE FOR PROMOTION THIS CYCLE.” If the brigadier
general has an approved retirement on file mark
“RETIREMENT.” Contact AF/A1LG or SF/S1L for any
questions regarding the board convening date.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 243
15b
Numerical Grade
Complete this block for brigadier generals only if “Eligible For
Promotion This Cycle” is checked in block 15a. The exception
to this rule is for officers who are approved for retirement. 10
U.S.C § 619, Eligibility for Consideration for Promotion: Time
in Grade and Other Requirements “requires officers who have an
approved date of separation 90 or more days from the date the
board convenes are eligible for promotion consideration.” If an
officer has a date of separation within 90 days of the board
convening date, do not complete this block. If the date of
separation is 90 or more days from the convening date the officer
must be considered and block 15b must be completed.
16
Comments
See instructions for block 11 (this table). Comments will be
typed in plain language (narrative) format in Times New Roman,
12 pitch font and limited to 250 characters. If the rater is also the
management level, use block 11 to enter comments or type “The
rater is also the endorsing official,” in block 16.
17
Endorser’s ID
(name, grade, and
duty title)
Do not sign or date prior to the “TO” date. This block will still
be completed if marked “The rater is also the endorsing official.”
18
Signature
Digital Signature.
19
Date
Date of signature will auto populate.
Table 7.2. Instructions for DAF Form 77 for General Officers.
A
B
C
To Complete
Instructions
Sec
Block
I
Name
In all upper-case letters, enter last name, first name middle initial, and
JR., SR., etc. Use of “NMI” when there is no middle initial is
optional.
Social Security
Number
Enter social security number.
Grade
Select the appropriate grade.
See Notes.
Duty Air Force
Specialty Code or
Duty Space Force
Specialty Code
Enter "90G0."
Duty Title or Title
of Additional
Duty
Enter the approved duty title as of the THRU date of the evaluation.
244 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Deployed
Location or
Named Operation
Deployed CC LOE only. If applicable, enter the
operation/contingency name ratee was deployed in support of. (e.g.,
Operation ENDURING FREEDOM).
IIA
Type of Report
Drop Down Menu.
For Formal/Informal LOEs, enter: Letter of Evaluation;
For Supplemental Sheets, enter: Supplemental Sheet;
For Acquisition Examiner, Functional Examiner, AF or SF Advisor,
enter: Acquisition Examiner, Functional Examiner, AF or SF Advisor
For Administrative LOEs, leave blank.
IIB
Report Dates
Enter the dates as they appear on the DAF Form 78. If a TDY rating
official is rendering a report because of the ratee's TDY of 90 days or
more, enter the inclusive dates of the TDY.
“Report is...”
Drop Down Menu. Select either “Mandatory” or “Optional.” See
Table 5.2. If the DAF Form 77 will be attached to the AF Form 78 or
is being rendered by a TDY rating official resulting from the ratee's
TDY of 60 calendar days or more, mark the box entitled,
"Mandatory." All other AF Forms 77 are optional.
Level of
Deployed CC
Duties Performed
Deployed Commander LOE only. Drop Down Menu. Select either
Det CC, Squadron CC, Group CC, or Wing CC.
Number of Days
in CC Position
Deployed Commander LOE Only. Enter the number of consecutive
days served in the deployed commander position, on G-series orders.
G-Series Order
Number/Date of
Order
Deployed Commander LOE Only. Enter the G-Series Order Number.
Deployed Commander LOE Only. Enter the date of the G-Series
Order.
III
Deployed
Commander
Assessment
Deployed Commander LOE Only. Select “Yes” if the officer
satisfactorily completed their deployed commander tour. Select “No”
if completion was unsatisfactory. If “No,” the report must be referred.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 245
IV
Comments
Hand-write comments in dark blue or black ink. Limit comments to
the space provided. Include comments concerning personal and
professional characteristics with emphasis on potential to assume a
higher grade or increased responsibilities. Also, consider ratee’s
success in contributing to a healthy organizational climate, or
command climate (if ratee is a commander). As supporting rationale,
identify specific jobs where the ratee could be used in a higher grade.
If not being recommended for promotion but is being recommended
for further service in the ratee’s current grade, identify options for
future use. If an officer is the subject of a substantiated allegation,
complaint, or investigation, or if the officer was removed from duty
for cause, use this section to address the issue(s). Do not consider or
comment on the marital status or the employment, educational
activities, or volunteer service activities of the ratee’s spouse. As
applicable, include comments on achievements in implementing the
recommendations of the Secretary of Defense's Report to the President
on Defense Management of July 1989.
IV
Evaluator Data
Information will be as of the THRU date of the report. Sign original
on or after THRU date. Once the U.S. Senate confirms the promotion,
major general selectees may sign the DAF Form 77 as a selectee. See
Notes. Remaining blocks are self-explanatory.
Notes: (Brigadier and Major General “(Sel)”/“Frocked” signing Officer Evaluation System
forms)
a. Once Senate confirmed, colonels on the brigadier general select list are permitted to
sign all Officer Evaluation System forms as “(Sel)” provided that they are either designated by
their respective management level as a senior rater or they are assigned to an authorized
brigadier general officer position.
b. Once Senate confirmed, brigadier generals on the major general select list are permitted
to sign all Officer Evaluation System forms as “(Sel)” provided that they are either evaluating
other general officers or are assigned to an authorized Maj Gen officer position.
c. Frocked general officers are authorized to sign all Officer Evaluation System forms in
their frocked grade without designating their “Frocked” status (e.g., major general vice major
general “Frocked”).
d. Once Senate confirmed, all general officer selects assigned to joint billets or unified
commands may sign all Officer Evaluation System forms as “(Sel)”.
246 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Chapter 8
(REGAF AND ARC ONLY) PROMOTION RECOMMENDATION AND
MANAGEMENT LEVEL REVIEW (MLR) PROCESS
8.1. AF Form 709 (for ADL officers).
8.1.1. Purpose. The purpose of the promotion recommendation process is to provide
performance-based differentiation to assist central selection boards. The AF Form 709,
Promotion Recommendation (PRF), is used for promotion purposes only. Note: Except for
paragraphs 8.1.3.1.1–8.1.3.2.1.2, 8.1.3.2.3– 8.1.3.2.6.4, 8.2 and 8.6, this chapter does not
pertain to ARC officers who are not on the ADL.
8.1.2. Types of PRFs:
8.1.2.1. Narrative-Only PRFs. The losing senior rater completes these on all lieutenant
colonels and below. Exception: Not required for majors who are lieutenant colonel
selects, or lieutenant colonels who are colonel selects departing PCS for a school (e.g.,
developmental education, AFIT, or other AF-level training programs as described by
paragraph 8.3.5.2) or PCA/PCS to patient status. Complete narrative-only PRFs
regardless of promotion zone/promotion opportunity. Do not complete PRFs on
lieutenants or captains who will have less than four years’ time-in-grade as a captain upon
completion of schooling. Exception: For medical corps and dental corps officers only,
complete narrative-only PRFs regardless of their current grade, date of rank or promotion
selection status, due to the possibilities of their continual long term training status. See
paragraph 8.1.5.6. Note: In the rare case where a PRF is required for colonels and
colonel or lieutenant colonel selects while in a student status, the senior rater prior to the
officer’s departure to developmental education will write the PRF.
8.1.2.2. Recommendation-Only PRFs. The Air Force Student MLR President completes
these for all officers who are eligible for consideration by that review. Attach the
recommendation-only PRF to the narrative-only PRF and file both in the OSR. See
paragraph 8.1.5.6.
8.1.2.3. Regular PRFs. An eligible officer’s senior rater completes the PRF no earlier than
60 calendar days prior to the central selection board for which the officer is promotion
eligible (PRF cutoff date) and awards one of three recommendations (or four
recommendations for officers in the grade of colonel only):
8.1.2.3.1. A “Definitely Promote This Board” recommendation (for colonel only). The
strength of the ratee’s performance and performance-based potential warrants
promotion in the board in which the officer is eligible for promotion.
8.1.2.3.2. A “Definitely Promote” (DP) recommendation. The strength of the ratee’s
performance and performance-based potential warrants promotion.
8.1.2.3.3. A “Promote” recommendation means the ratee is qualified for promotion
and should compete on the basis of performance, performance-based potential, and
other considerations such as duty history, developmental education, advanced degrees,
etc.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 247
8.1.2.3.4. A “Do Not Promote This Board” recommendation. The strength of the
ratee’s performance and performance-based potential does not warrant promotion by
the central selection boards for which the officer is eligible. A senior rater must make
comments explaining to the central selection boards why the officer should not be
promoted. (T-1) Comments must focus on the substandard behavior of the officer and,
if desired, the punishment received. (T-1)
8.1.3. Completing the PRF. See Table 8.1 and paragraph 8.6 on promotion-eligible colonels
for specific guidance on preparing PRFs.
8.1.3.1. Comments in Section IV, Promotion Recommendation, of the PRF are mandatory
for In-or Above-the-Promotion Zone eligible officers. Senior raters retain the latitude to
push their best-qualified officers for promotion consideration. Senior raters should
consider providing comments for officers two or more times Above-the-Promotion Zone
up to the grade of colonel; comments are option on PRFs prepared to the grade o brigadier
general when the overall recommendation on the AF Form 709 is “Promote.” Comments
are required on all PRFs with a “Do Not Promote This Board” recommendation, regardless
of zone (Table 8.1.). Final decision authority for including comments on Below-the-
Promotion Zone and two or more times Above-the-Promotion Zone officers remains with
the senior rater.
8.1.3.1.1. In the performance recommendation, the senior rater should use plain
language and limit use of acronyms and/or abbreviations to provide a performance-
based differentiation and/or characterization of the eligible officer’s potential to serve
in the next higher grade. For officers being considered for colonel and below,
promotion recommendations are limited to the space provided.
8.1.3.1.2. Endorsements for promotion are based upon an officer’s demonstrated
character and competence as detailed in the Secretary of the Air Force’s Memorandum
of Instruction for promotion boards. This is an opportunity for the senior rater to tell
the Central Selection Board why they should or should not promote this officer. This
should not be a summary of information already contained in the record of
performance. Recommendations or pushes for items that are decided through other
processes or means (e.g., developmental education, jobs, assignments) are not
authorized.
8.1.3.1.3. Comments on PRFs regarding completion of, or enrollment in, DE are
prohibited. Performance and special recognition comments on officers attending in-
residence education and/or training will be documented appropriately on the AF Form
475 (see Chapter 6). Additionally, evaluators will not comment on an officer’s status
on the school’s list, selection for DE, and/or specific schools. Note: An assignment
recommendation for Air Force Institute of Technology Master’s or Doctoral degree
program is authorized.
8.1.3.2. Promotion Recommendation Form Stratification Guidance. Officer stratification
is defined as a quantitative comparison of an individual’s standing within an authorized
peer group and within a specific evaluator’s scope of rating authority. On the PRF, officer
stratifications provide a current period performance-based differentiation of officers
against their peers to assist central selection boards. Senior raters may provide up to two
types of stratifications as part of their promotion recommendation comments. If used, the
248 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
primary stratification must be among promotion eligible officers by zone and the optional
secondary stratification must be among an authorized peer group. If a senior rater does not
stratify an officer among eligible officers by promotion zone, they may not provide any
other stratification. Exception: For narrative-only PRFs, senior raters will not stratify
among eligible officers by promotion zone but may provide one peer group stratification
statement.
8.1.3.2.1. Stratification Types.
8.1.3.2.1.1. Primary - Eligible by Zone. Senior raters may stratify among eligible
officers by promotion zone (e.g., In-or-above-the promotion zone (I/APZ) from the
MEL for a specific promotion board. Example: #3/10 I/APZ eligible.
8.1.3.2.1.2. Secondary – Peer Group Stratification. If a senior rater stratifies an
officer among eligible officers by promotion zone, they may also provide a second
stratification in accordance with the following guiding principles.
8.1.3.2.2. Authorized Peer Groups. For the purposes of stratification, authorized peer
groups are limited to the following categories: (Note: Only on authorized peer group
will be used as a secondary stratification.)
8.1.3.2.2.1. AF Grade. Includes only Air Force officers in the same grade (e.g.,
captains, majors, lieutenant colonels, colonels). Exception: An officer
permanently assigned to a position on a joint manning document may be stratified
against officers of the same grade, regardless of service affiliation, within the senior
rater’s scope of rating authority as described below.
8.1.3.2.2.2. Command Position. This refers to officers filling command positions
(e.g., detachment, squadron, group, or wing commanders and materiel leaders).
This does not include section commanders or flight commanders. Command
position stratification statements for individuals below the grade of colonel (O-6)
may also include their grade with the stratification statement (e.g., #2/6 Maj
Sq/CCs).
8.1.3.2.2.3. Duty Position. This refers to the officer’s duty position type, level and
scope of responsibility (e.g., section chiefs, flight commanders, operations officers,
branch chiefs, action officers, analysts, instructors, combat systems officers, pilots,
etc.). Officers may be stratified against civilian personnel in equivalent duty
positions. Note: In order to use the duty position stratification category, the officer
must first be stratified within their USAF or USSF grade or developmental category
to ground the statement and communicate the clearest depiction of where an officer
stands (e.g., “#1/1 Capts,” “#1/40 Analysts;” “#2/6 Combat Support Majs,” “#3/41
Flight Commanders”).
8.1.3.2.3. Exception. For narrative-only PRFs, senior raters will not stratify among
eligible officers by promotion zone but may provide one peer group stratification.
8.1.3.2.4. Scope of Rating Authority. Senior raters can only stratify officers within the
confines of their direct rating chain and knowledge. Senior rater stratifications may
not extend beyond the confines of their respective SRID (i.e., senior raters may not
stratify officers under subordinate SRIDs purviews).
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 249
8.1.3.2.5. Authorized Usage.
8.1.3.2.5.1. When used, all stratifications must stay within an authorized peer
group and the evaluator’s scope of rating authority.
8.1.3.2.5.2. Stratifications must be written in quantitative terms. (T-1) The use of
percentages in the numerator are prohibited (e.g., 5%/50). Examples of authorized
stratifications:
8.1.3.2.5.2.1. By AF Grade. “#3/30 Capts;” “#1/1 Majs;” “#2/12 Lt Cols.”
8.1.3.2.5.2.2. By Command Position. “#1/9 Grp/CCs;” “#1/7 Maj Sq/CCs;”
“#3/20 Lt Col Det/CCs.”
8.1.3.2.5.2.3. By Duty Position. “#1/6 Flt/CCs;” “#1/40 Analysts;” “#2/12
Branch Chiefs.”
8.1.3.2.6. Prohibited Usage.
8.1.3.2.6.1. Company grade officers (CGOs) and/or field grade officers (FGOs) are
not an authorized peer group for stratification purposes.
8.1.3.2.6.2. Awards are recognition based on a given set of criteria. Accordingly,
stratifications based on awards are not authorized (e.g., #1/50 as Sq CGO of the
Quarter).
8.1.3.2.6.3. The use of stratifications from anyone other than the senior rater are
prohibited. A senior rater may not quote stratification from another evaluator or
source. Using more than one secondary stratification is prohibited.
8.1.3.3. If promotion opportunity is 100%, regular PRFs are not required. This includes
individuals competing for I/APZ. Senior raters will prepare PRFs on all officers who
receive "Do Not Promote" recommendations and on all officers who receive a “Promote”
recommendation but have derogatory information (Article 15, courts-martial, referral
evaluation, Letter of Reprimand) filed in their OSR.
8.1.3.4. Statements that refer or imply to the stratification of an officer’s standing at a
MLR, such as: “#1 of 22 DPs awarded at the MLR,” or “If the MLR had one more DP,
they would get it,” are prohibited. This means the head of the management level or MPR
president may not use the denominator of the management levels eligibles when stratifying
their respective officers, who may have or have not competed at the MLR.
8.1.3.5. Promotion statements, reserved for the senior rater, will only be made on the PRF.
8.1.3.5.1. As a general rule, prohibited promotion statements are any comments, direct
or implied, that refer to a higher grade. For example, comments that state the individual
is performing above their grade, occupying a position requiring a more senior grade,
comparing an individual to officers of higher grade, or alluding to a higher-ranking
position are all prohibited.
8.1.3.5.2. While it is impossible to provide an all-inclusive list of prohibited
statements; some examples are:
8.1.3.5.2.1. “Maj Beidler is senior officer material.” The term “senior” is a
euphemism for colonel and above, therefore not authorized.
250 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
8.1.3.5.2.2. “Capt DeSantis has excelled in a major’s billet,” refers to a grade
higher than the one the individual currently holds.
8.1.3.5.2.3. “Major Jenkins should be a group commander now,” recommends the
individual for a position two grades higher than the ratee—not normal progression.
8.1.3.5.2.4. “Capt Korte is ready for our toughest field grade jobs,” compares a
company grade officer with higher ranking, field grade officers.
8.1.3.5.2.5. “Already performing above current position,” refers to a higher grade.
8.1.4. Responsibilities:
8.1.4.1. The Senior Rater:
8.1.4.1.1. Reviews the ratee's officer’s OCSRG, decoration citations, duty
qualification history brief (DQHB) and UIF (if applicable) before preparing the PRF.
May consider other reliable information about duty performance and conduct except as
paragraph 1.12 or other regulatory guidance prohibits. Examples of other reliable
information may include but are not limited to LOEs, statements from a draft officer
ALQ evaluation and/or decoration, etc. To reference the “other reliable information”
in their record, the officer meeting the board may submit a letter to the central selection
board.
8.1.4.1.1.1. Do not use any other single unit retrieval formats (SURF) other than
those indicated above when preparing the PRF (e.g., Assignment Management
System (AMS), SURF).
8.1.4.1.1.2. The intent of the "other reliable information" passage is to allow senior
raters to comment on performance accomplishments since the close-out of the last
evaluation. This allows a senior rater who has personal knowledge of an
accomplishment to comment about it in the PRF although not part of the official
record yet.
8.1.4.1.2. Must be knowledgeable of the ratee's most recent performance. The senior
rater may request subordinate supervisors to provide information on an officer's most
recent duty performance and performance-based potential and may ask for suggestions
based upon the officer's duty performance for PRF recommendations.
8.1.4.1.3. Will ensure no subordinate commander and/or supervisor asks or allows an
officer to draft or prepare their own PRF. Note: Eligible officers may provide input.
8.1.4.1.4. Will ensure there are no boards, meetings or panels of officers convened to
collectively score, rate, rank, stratify, produce stratification inputs for use in PRFs, or
tally the records and/or generate a priority list of eligible officers unless specifically
authorized by this instruction. Note: Senior raters may request subordinate
supervisors provide their assessment (without the use of any boards, meetings, or
panels) of the rank order of officers in their chain of command).
8.1.4.1.5. Is solely responsible for evaluating each officer’s OCSRG, career brief, and
DQHB in order to either award PRF recommendations among eligible officers or
submit officers to compete for aggregation or carry-over “Definitely Promote”
recommendations. The senior rater submits the PRF with Section IX unmarked when
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 251
submitting an officer for competition in aggregation or carry-over categories at a MLR
and/or HAF MLR.
8.1.4.1.6. Completes promotion recommendations. Corrects any error that results in
awarding more “Definitely Promote” recommendations than allocated by the
management level. However, if the senior rater fails to fulfill this responsibility, the
MLR president makes the appropriate corrections, to include re-accomplishing a PRF
a senior rater prepared.
8.1.4.1.7. Provides the ratee a copy of the PRF approximately 30 calendar days before
the central selection board. If communication cannot be completed in person, send the
PRF via secure communications. The reason for this is twofold:
8.1.4.1.7.1. Advise the ratee of the senior rater’s promotion recommendation.
8.1.4.1.7.2. Provide the ratee an opportunity to point out any typographical,
administrative or errors of fact to the senior rater so they may be corrected prior to
the central selection board. Note: If the ratee is geographically separated, send it
to the ratee by secure electronic communication, or “return receipt requested” mail.
Contact the MPF for assistance if necessary.
8.1.4.1.8. Must attach a memo (Figure 8.1) telling the ratee who receives a PRF with
a “Do Not Promote This Board” recommendation that they have the right to submit a
letter to the Central Selection Board.
8.1.4.1.9. Will ensure the PRF remains a private matter with access being only between
the senior rater, the ratee, senior rater administrative support staff if senior rater desires
(e.g., executive officer, secretary, MPF), the MLR, and the central selection board.
Subordinate evaluators or others may have access to a PRF’s comments or rating only
if permitted by the ratee. Note: No officer eligible for a particular board will be
involved with the PRF process for that particular board.
8.1.4.1.10. Considers preparing a PRF on a newly assigned eligible officer who
received an outright “Promote” recommendation from their previous senior rater, (an
outright “Promote” is someone who received a promote recommendation from the
senior rater and was not competed at an MLR). The exception is AF-level students
meeting the AF Student MLR, and whose effective date of duty as a result of PCS/PCA
to a new senior rater occurs after the PRF accounting date, but on or before the PRF
cutoff date. See paragraph 8.4.1.
8.1.4.1.11. Provides a signed MEL of officers considered for promotion
recommendations to the management level.
8.1.4.1.12. Ensures the management level receives PRFs as required by paragraph
8.1.5.
8.1.4.1.13. Ensures their SRID in the Air Force Promotion Management System
reflects only their eligible officers no later than 105 days before the central selection
board.
8.1.4.1.14. Evaluates all additions to and deletions from the MEL through their MPFs
to their management level (e.g., officers who are gains as a result of a PCA/PCS
252 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
movement occurring prior to the PRF accounting date or officers initially assigned to
the wrong PAS code and SRID).
8.1.4.1.15. Officers Added or Deleted from Promotion Eligibility. This paragraph
applies to officers who become eligible or ineligible for promotion consideration in a
particular competitive category on or after the PRF accounting date. Causes for a
change in eligibility status may include: a special selection board (SSB) or AFBCMR
actions, administrative errors, changes in date of separation, or similar circumstances.
8.1.4.1.15.1. For officers whose eligibility for promotion consideration is
established after the PRF accounting date, the senior rater of record at the time
eligibility is established will write the PRF.
8.1.4.1.15.2. If the PRF is written after the senior rater completes the rank ordering
(Day-66) and determines that a definitely promote should be awarded, then place a
“1” in block VI for IPZ officer or place a “0” in block VI for APZ officers. See
Table 8.2.
8.1.4.2. The Military Personnel Flight (MPF):
8.1.4.2.1. Assists the management level in verifying accuracy of SRIDs and PAS
codes.
8.1.4.2.2. Provides PRF notices, a MEL, and a DQHB on each eligible officer to the
senior raters. Note: For officers not located with the senior rater, provide these
documents to eligible officers’ servicing MPF to be used in preparing PRF inputs for
the senior rater.
8.1.4.2.3. Provides other senior rater support and review as requested. The MPF will
send PRFs to the appropriate management level when requested by the senior raters.
8.1.4.2.4. Makes officers’ OCSRGs available to senior raters, to include records of
officers serviced by other MPFs.
8.1.4.2.5. Reviews PRFs to ensure administrative accuracy, when requested.
8.1.4.2.6. Processes narrative-only PRFs. See paragraph 8.1.5.6.
8.1.4.2.7. Advises senior raters when officers change promotion eligibility status after
the PRF allocation date (Day 66). See paragraph 8.1.4.1.15.
8.1.4.2.8. Ensures senior raters are provided a listing of newly assigned eligible
officers.
8.1.4.2.9. Evaluates any potential additions or deletions to the MELs for the senior
raters and management level they service. See paragraph 8.1.4.1.14.
8.1.4.2.10. Monitors Air Force Promotion Management System audit transactions at
least twice a week to identify any board adds, deletions, SRID changes, PCS/PCA,
and/or date arrived on station actions.
8.1.4.2.11. Coordinates with management level and senior raters as needed.
8.1.4.2.12. Check the Air Force Promotion Management System news daily.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 253
8.1.4.2.13. Upon receipt of PRFs following the USAF Student MLR, distribute these
PRFs to the eligible officers. See paragraph 8.1.4.1.7.
8.1.4.3. The Management Level:
8.1.4.3.1. Designates senior rater positions for all units within their jurisdiction and
assigns SRIDs to those positions.
8.1.4.3.2. Identifies officers occupying those senior rater positions by name, assigns
them SRIDs by name and PAS code and ensures the Air Force Promotion Management
System is updated accordingly.
8.1.4.3.3. Validates SRID alignment in MilPDS with PAS code. Note: Ensure
MilPDS is updated accordingly; contact AFPC for any assistance.
8.1.4.3.4. Notifies senior raters and MPFs of preliminary “Definitely Promote”
allocations.
8.1.4.3.5. Notifies affected senior raters on the final PRF allocation date of available
“Definitely Promote” recommendations senior raters may award.
8.1.4.3.6. Ensures all eligible officers are considered for promotion recommendations
and are guaranteed at least one look for a “Definitely Promote” recommendation (the
guaranteed look is the senior rater).
8.1.4.3.7. Ensures senior raters and MLRs do not exceed the authorized number of
“Definitely Promote” allocations.
8.1.4.3.8. Ensures PRF recommendations on eligible officers are updated in the Air
Force Promotion Management System no later than 35 calendar days before the central
selection board.
8.1.4.3.9. Send all regular PRFs to AFPC/DPMSPE to arrive no later than 30 calendar
days before the central selection board.
8.1.4.3.10. Maintains copies of all PRFs and MELs until announcement of central
selection board results. Destroy all materials pertaining to the MLR upon
announcement of results. Exception: Maintain a copy of the OCSRG, including the
PRF, career brief of the competitive categories considered, and duty qualifications
history brief that earned the last “Definitely Promote” and the top two that earned a
“Promote” recommendation in carry-over competition for each competitive category,
or in the case that no “Definitely Promote” recommendations were awarded, maintain
the top two that earned a “Promote” recommendation. These records will serve as
benchmark records in support of a supplemental review. (T-1)
8.1.4.3.11. Processes PRFs in accordance with paragraph 8.1.5.
8.1.4.3.12. Evaluates any potential additions or deletions to their senior raters and
coordinates with AFPC/DPMSPE as needed.
8.1.4.3.13. Monitors the Air Force Promotion Management System audit transactions
at least twice a week to identify any board additions, deletions, SRID changes,
PCS/PCA/date arrived station actions.
8.1.4.3.14. Coordinates with senior raters, MPFs, and AFPC/DPMSPE as needed.
254 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
8.1.4.3.15. Monitors the Air Force Promotion Management System news daily.
8.1.4.3.16. Ensures the SecAF’s MOI is available on myPers, is referenced and utilized
for all MLRs and senior rater promotion processes within their purview. The MOI
provides instructions to all management levels and senior raters to ensure decision
makers throughout the officer promotion recommendation process are focused on the
same priorities and special emphasis areas as the central selection board.
8.1.4.4. AFPC/DPMSPE:
8.1.4.4.1. Establishes and announces PRF eligibility criteria and administrative
requirements for processing PRFs.
8.1.4.4.2. Ensures completed PRFs are disposed of in accordance with paragraph
8.1.5.
8.1.4.4.3. Flows PRF notices and duty qualification history briefs approximately 120
calendar days prior to the central selection board in the Air Force Promotion
Management System.
8.1.4.4.4. Processes all SRID changes with multiple management levels involved.
Note: It remains the initiating management level’s responsibility to obtain all
concurrences for other affected management levels prior to submission to AFPC.
8.1.4.5. The Ratee:
8.1.4.5.1. Contacts the senior rater to discuss any errors, omissions pertaining to the
PRF or if they have not received a copy of their PRF NLT 15 calendar days prior to
central selection board. (T-3)
8.1.4.5.2. May correspond by letter with the central selection board and address any
matter of record concerning themselves that they believe important to their
consideration. Letters must be submitted in good faith and contain accurate
information to the best of the ratee’s knowledge and must be signed by the ratee. (T-3)
8.1.4.5.3. Air Force Level students and patients (SRID “ST101” and “PT111”) eligible
for promotion may write a letter to the Air Force Student MLR to address any matter
of record concerning themselves that they believe important to their consideration.
Letters must be submitted in good faith and contain accurate information to the best of
the ratee’s knowledge and must be signed by the ratee. (T-1) The letters will be
destroyed upon conclusion of the Student MLR and will not be forwarded to the central
selection board. (T-3)
8.1.5. Processing and Using the PRF.
8.1.5.1. MPFs send PRF notices and MELs to senior raters upon receipt, approximately
120 days prior to the central selection board.
8.1.5.2. Senior raters sign completed PRFs on or after the PRF cutoff date. Senior raters
who intend to compete in aggregation (see paragraph 8.3.1.10) or carry-over (see
paragraph 8.3.1.9), must prepare and sign the PRFs, leaving Section IX blank.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 255
8.1.5.3. Senior raters will submit all completed PRFs for quality review and ensure all
PRFs are available for update into the Air Force Promotion Management System by the
management level no later than 40 calendar days before the central selection board. (T-1)
8.1.5.4. The management level sends completed PRFs to AFPC/DPMSPE to arrive no
later than 30 calendar days before the central selection board. Management levels forward
PRFs to AFPC/DPMSPE for officers nominated to the AF MLR aggregate and carry-over,
with the “Overall Recommendation” left blank, to arrive no later than 35 calendar days
prior to the central selection board. When mailing hardcopy PRFs, documents may be sent
to AFPC/DPMSPE, 550 C Street West Suite 7, Joint Base San Antonio-Randolph TX
78150-4705
8.1.5.5. AFPC/DPMSPE forwards all PRFs to AFPC/DP1ORM to be filed in the officer’s
ARMS for the central selection board. AFPC/DP1ORM destroys the PRFs after imaging.
PRFs filed on optical disk have limited access. Do not use them for assignments,
promotions (except SSBs, or other personnel actions. Retain these PRFs for historical,
legal, and appeal purposes only.
8.1.5.6. Narrative-only/Recommendation-only PRFs.
8.1.5.6.1. MPFs are responsible for processing narrative-only PRFs and ensuring all
eligible officers receive a copy of their narrative-only PRF prior to departure for PCS.
Note: Officers will not depart without a narrative-only PRF being accomplished
unless an approved waiver was granted in accordance with paragraph 8.1.5.6.4.1.
8.1.5.6.2. The senior rater sends the narrative-only PRF to the MPF no later than 30
calendar days prior to the officer departing PCA or PCS for school. Note: An officer
may become eligible for I/APZ consideration by a central selection board before
departing for school. In this case, prepare both a narrative-only PRF and a regular PRF
(see paragraph 8.1.2.3.). An officer may also be eligible for two or more promotion
boards while in AF-level student status, depending on the length of training. Since
narrative-only PRFs are not board specific, statements such as “My #1 Below-the-
Promotion Zone,” may become outdated before the officer meets a promotion board,
however, this should not preclude the senior rater from stratifying the officers as would
on a regular PRF.
8.1.5.6.3. The senior rater sends the narrative-only PRFs to the MPF for officers in
patient or missing-in-action/prisoner of war status. The MPF will process the PRF to
AFPC/DPMSPE no later than 60 calendar days after the officer enters this new status.
8.1.5.6.4. The MPF forwards the original PRFs to AFPC/DPMSPE NLT 30 calendar
days after the officer departs and updates a code “B” in MilPDS. The MPF maintains
copies of the PRFs until PRF receipt is confirmed by an update of NAR PRF Flag to
code “C” in MilPDS by AFPC/DPMSPE. MPFs can verify that the “C” code is updated
under officer grade data/grade miscellaneous in MilPDS. Once confirmed, the MPF
destroys its copies.
8.1.5.6.4.1. All narrative-only PRF waiver requests will be worked directly with
AFPC/DPMSPE.
8.1.5.6.4.2. When requesting narrative-only PRF waivers, please include the
256 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
following information: Full name, social security number, date of rank,
competitive category, projected graduation date, and reason for the request. Note:
As waivers are reviewed using current schedules, should an officer become eligible
after a waiver has been granted, the narrative-only PRF will then be required from
the senior rater who was in the position when the officer departed for school. Only
if the senior rater is not available (retired and unable to be contacted or deceased,
etc.) will the current senior rater in the position be authorized to sign the narrative-
only PRF after the officer departed.
8.1.5.6.5. Senior raters provide a copy of the narrative-only PRF to the ratee
approximately 30 calendar days prior to departure for AF level training or patient
status.
8.1.5.6.6. AFPC/DPMSPE maintains narrative-only PRFs until officers leave student,
patient, or missing-in-action/prisoner of war status. AFPC/DPMSPE destroys
narrative-only PRFs when the officer no longer competes as a student.
AFPC/DPMSPE maintains the narrative-only PRFs until distributed as specified
below:
8.1.5.6.6.1. AFPC/DPMSPE forwards the narrative-only PRF to the HAF Student
MLR. After completion of the recommendation-only PRFs (which are attached to
the narrative-only PRFs), AFPC/DPMSPE forwards the narrative-only PRF and
recommendation-only PRF to the official record, ARMS and PRDA, for inclusion
in the OSR and provides copies to ratees via the ratees’ servicing MPF.
8.1.5.6.6.2. AFPC/DPMSPE maintains the original narrative-only PRF in a
separate file for use during future promotion consideration as a student. Exceptions
to the disposition of PRFs must be approved by AFPC/DPMSPE and be in the best
interest of the officer and the Air Force.
8.1.5.6.6.3. Immediately after completion of the central selection board, the
Selection Board Secretariat (AFPC/PB) removes the PRFs from the OSR and
forwards them to AFPC/DP1ORM for placement on optical disk.
8.1.5.7. The HAF Student MLR (see paragraph 8.3.5.2.2) prepares recommendation-only
PRFs and attaches them to the student narrative-only PRFs.
8.2. AF Form 709 for RASL Officers.
8.2.1. Reserve of the Air Force. Use AF Form 709 for promotion to captain through colonel.
Refer to paragraph 7.6 for recommending colonels for promotion to the grade of brigadier
general. AFR will use AF Form 709 for position vacancy promotion nominations to all grades.
ARPC/PB will issue instructions specific to each board via ARPC memorandums (ARPCMs).
8.2.1.1. Mandatory Boards. An eligible officer’s senior rater submits the completed PRF
no later than 45 calendar days prior to the central selection board. The senior rater awards
one of three recommendations from the drop-down menu in block IX of AF Form 709:
8.2.1.1.1. A “Definitely Promote”: The strength of the ratee’s performance and
performance-based potential warrants promotion. Note: The ResAF is not constrained
by the number of “Definitely Promotes” it can award. A senior rater may award as
many “Definitely Promotes” as desired.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 257
8.2.1.1.2. A “Promote”: The ratee is qualified for promotion and should compete on
the basis of performance, performance-based potential, and other considerations such
as duty history, developmental education, advanced degrees, etc.
8.2.1.1.3. A “Do Not Promote This Board”: The strength of the ratee’s performance
and performance-based potential does not warrant promotion by the central selection
board for which the officer is eligible. A senior rater must make comments explaining
to the central selection board why the officer should not be promoted.
8.2.2. Completing the PRF. See Table 8.1 for specific guidance on preparing PRFs.
8.2.3. Responsibilities:
8.2.3.1. The Senior Rater:
8.2.3.1.1. Reviews the ratees’ evaluations, decoration citations, DQHB, personnel
information file, and UIF (if applicable) before preparing the PRF. They may also
consider other reliable information about duty performance and conduct except as
outlined in paragraph 1.12 or other regulatory guidance. Examples of other reliable
information may include but are not limited to LOEs and statements from a draft
performance report and/or decoration. To reference the other reliable information in
their record, the officer meeting the board may submit a letter to the central selection
board. Note: Do not use any other single uniform request formats other than those
indicated above when preparing the PRF (i.e., AMS SURFs). The intent of the other
reliable information passage is to allow the senior rater to comment on performance
accomplishments since the close out of the last evaluation. This allows a senior rater
who has personal knowledge of an accomplishment to comment about it in the PRF
although not part of the official record yet. The senior rater of record on the PRF
accounting date will write the PRF.
8.2.3.1.2. May obtain information on an officer’s most recent duty performance and
performance-based potential from subordinate or previous supervisors and may
consider their suggestions based upon the officer’s duty performance for PRF
recommendations. No officer will be asked to draft or prepare their own PRF. There
will be no boards or panels of officers convened to collectively score, rate, rank, or
tally the records and/or generate a priority list of eligible officers.
8.2.3.1.3. Is solely responsible for evaluating each officer’s record of performance and
DQHB, to award recommendations.
8.2.3.1.4. Completes promotion recommendations.
8.2.3.1.5. Provides the ratee a copy of the PRF (hand-delivered or sent in a sealed
envelope clearly marked, “To Be Opened By Addressee Only”) approximately 30
calendar days before the central selection board. PRFs are a private matter between the
senior rater and the ratee. Subordinate evaluators may have access to a PRF rating to
assist in the feedback process only if desired by the ratee. The senior rater must attach
a memo (Figure 8.1) telling the ratee who receives a PRF with a “Do Not Promote This
Board” recommendation that they have the right to submit a letter to the central
selection board. The ratee must acknowledge receipt of the memorandum. If the ratee
258 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
is geographically separated, send it to the ratee by secure electronic communication or
by “return receipt requested” mail. Contact the MPF for assistance, if necessary.
8.2.3.2. The MPF or ARPC/PB (as applicable):
8.2.3.2.1. Verifies accuracy of SRID and PAS codes.
8.2.3.2.2. Provides to senior raters the PRF notice, a MEL, and a DQHB on each
eligible officer.
8.2.3.2.3. Provides other senior rater support as requested (sends PRFs to the
appropriate management level as requested by senior raters).
8.2.3.2.4. Makes record of performances available to senior raters, to include records
of officers serviced by other MPFs.
8.2.3.2.5. Reviews PRFs to ensure administrative accuracy, when requested.
8.2.3.2.6. Informs senior raters when officers have a change in promotion eligibility
status after the PRF accounting date.
8.2.3.2.7. Provides senior raters a listing of newly assigned eligible officers.
8.2.3.3. ARPC/PB. Will announce PRF criteria for ResAF central selection boards via an
ARPCM.
8.2.4. Processing and use of PRFs.
8.2.4.1. MPFs send PRF notices and MELs to senior raters upon receipt, usually just after
the PRF accounting date.
8.2.4.2. The senior rater will complete the PRF in enough time to arrive at ARPC not later
than 45 calendar days before the central selection board.
8.2.4.3. ARPC/PB posts the OSRs from the electronic board operations support system
(eBOSS) back to ARMS. The PRF becomes part of the “as-met” records for the officer’s
future reference.
8.2.5. Officers Relocating During the PRF Process. To ensure officers who are assigned to a
new senior rater after the PRF accounting date but on or before the central selection board,
receive full consideration for their PRF, the losing and gaining senior raters may discuss the
officer’s performance and their intentions. For ANG and AFR, the senior rater of record on
the PRF accounting date will write the PRF and award performance rating.
8.2.5.1. Award a “Do Not Promote This Board” recommendation when derogatory
information has been received since departure from previous assignment. If the losing
senior rater awards a “Do Not Promote This Board,” the gaining senior rater has no further
action. A senior rater must make specific comments to support the recommendation in
Section IV of the PRF. (T-2)
8.2.5.2. The MPF or ARPC/PB (as appropriate) will:
8.2.5.2.1. Screen all officers gained after the PRF accounting date to determine
eligibility and notify senior raters accordingly (refer to Air Force Promotion
Management System user’s guide). Ensure senior raters certify a review of all gained
eligible.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 259
8.2.5.2.2. Provide the senior rater a DQHB on newly assigned officers.
8.2.5.2.3. Update corrections to SRIDs on officers who arrive at new locations on or
before the PRF accounting date. Notify ARPC/PB when an update to the Air Force
Promotion Management System is needed.
8.2.6. Officers Added to Promotion Eligibility. This paragraph applies to officers who
become eligible for promotion consideration or change component or competitive categories
on or after the PRF accounting date. Cause for a change in eligibility may include, but is not
limited to: ANG to AFR transfer; AFR to ANG transfer; change from Participating Reserve
to Non-Participating Reserve, or Non-Participating Reserve to Participating Reserve; change
from ADL to RASL (without a break in military status); change from other branch of service
to USAF RASL; change in date of separation; administrative errors; SSB or AFBCMR actions;
or similar circumstances.
8.2.7. Ranking of “Definitely Promote” Recommendations. Enter the rank order, in the group
size (block IV of the AF Form 709), for all officers awarded a “Definitely Promote”
recommendation within each competitive category (e.g., line, judge advocate, nurse corps).
Example: 2/5/10. The senior rater has 10 officers in that competitive category meeting the
promotion selection board. The officer is ranked number 2 of 5 officers awarded a “Definitely
Promote” recommendation. For officers awarded other than a “Definitely Promote”
recommendation, leave group size blank. For officers gained after completion of PRFs, to
which the senior rater chooses to award a “Definitely Promote” recommendation, the ranking
will be 1/1/1. For a position vacancy board, enter the rank order for all officers nominated for
position vacancy within each competitive category. Example: 3/5. The senior rater has 5
officers in that competitive category meeting the position vacancy promotion selection board.
This officer is ranked number three of five officers awarded a “Definitely Promote”
recommendation.
8.2.8. Prisoners, Deserters, and Officers on Appellate Leave. Do not accomplish PRFs for
officers who become prisoners or deserters, or who are on appellate leave on or before the PRF
accounting date. ARPC/DPTSE will prepare an DAF Form 77. However, officers identified
as prisoners, deserters, or on appellate leave after the PRF accounting date will require PRFs
from the losing senior rater. The total number of eligible will include these officers.
8.2.9. Air Force Advisors for PRFs. If the senior rater on the PRF is not an Air Force officer
or Department of the Air Force official, an Air Force advisor is designated to advise evaluators
on matters pertaining to PRFs. Normally, this will be the same officer who conducts the review
of the officer’s ALQ evaluation. The Air Force advisor will not change any statements or the
promotion recommendation on the PRF.
8.2.10. Promotion Recommendations for Colonels. See paragraph 8.6 for AFR general
officer central selection boards or Air National Guard Federal Recognition Boards information
and instruction.
8.2.11. AGR Officers in Student Status. The Deputy to the Chief of Air Reserve (Deputy RE)
is the senior rater for AGR students only (AFR only).
8.2.11.1. When an AGR officer leaves for a school tour, the losing senior rater will prepare
a PRF as if the officer is still assigned. The PRF will be signed, but blocks VI, Group Size;
260 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
VII, Board; and IX, Overall Recommendation will remain blank. The PRF follows the
officer to the next assignment, and a copy is sent to AF/REE.
8.2.11.2. If, while in student status, the officer becomes eligible for consideration by a
promotion board, the narrative-only PRF is sent to the Deputy RE for a recommendation-
only PRF.
8.2.11.3. The Deputy RE prepares the recommendation-only PRF according to Table 8.1
and rank orders all officers awarded a “Definitely Promote” recommendation by
competitive category within the student population. Example: 1/2/2 rank order means
the senior rater has two officers in that competitive category meeting the selection board;
the officer is ranked number one of the two “Definitely Promote” recommendations
awarded. Note: Student AGR PRFs are not included within the SRID that applies to the
Chief of Air Force Reserve.
8.2.11.4. The narrative-only PRF is attached to the signed recommendation-only PRF and
is forwarded to the promotion secretariat at the Air Reserve Personnel Center.
8.3. Management Level Reviews (ADL Lieutenant Colonel and Below).
8.3.1. The Allocation Process:
8.3.1.1. Definitely Promote. “Definitely Promote” recommendations are limited in
number to ensure only the most qualified records are endorsed. They send a strong signal
to the central selection board that the officer is ready for immediate promotion. “Definitely
Promote” allocation rates for IPZ and APZ officers are lower than the IPZ promotion
opportunity; this ensures a significant number of officers receiving “Promote”
recommendations will be promoted. (T-1) Management levels receive a share of
“Definitely Promote” allocations based on the number of IPZ officers assigned. Allocation
rates vary for each competitive category, grade and promotion zone, and may fluctuate
according to changes in the promotion opportunity to guarantee the minimum promotion
rate for eligibles receiving a “Promote” recommendation (40% to major, 35% to lieutenant
colonel and 25% to colonel); this is called the promotion rate (P-Rate). AFPC/DPMSPE
publicizes the approved DP allocation rates for each PRF cycle in the Day 66 message.
Exception to policy requests of the approved DP allocation for each PRF cycle are not
authorized and will not be granted. (T-1).
8.3.1.2. PRF Accounting Date (approximately 150 calendar days before the central
selection board). On the PRF accounting date, AFPC matches eligible officers to senior
raters based on the officers’ unit of assignment data in MilPDS. AFPC/DPMSPE
announces the actual PRF accounting date. Between the PRF accounting date and Day 66
before the central selection board, management levels ensure the Air Force Promotion
Management System is accurate.
8.3.1.3. PRF Allocation Dates (approximately 150 and 66 calendar days before the central
selection board). The initial allocation date is approximately 150 calendar days before the
central selection board. This is when management levels estimate the number of
allocations available to each senior rater and for each MLR under their jurisdiction. After
this date, the number of allocations is adjusted to account for officers who become eligible
or ineligible for promotion and for officers who are still not aligned under the correct SRID
as verified and reported by the management level activity to AFPC/DPMSPE. These
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 261
adjustments are made up until the day before the PRF final allocation date (approximately
66 calendar days before the central selection board). On that day, the management level
determines the actual number of allocations and distributes to senior raters and MLRs based
on the number of eligible officers for that level. No changes are made to the number of a
management level’s allocations on or after the final allocation date unless authorized by
AFPC/DP3SP. In addition, no changes in the management level’s allocations are
authorized in cases where a brigadier general (Sel) is confirmed by the U.S. Senate on or
after day 66 and subsequently becomes eligible to be the senior rater for lieutenant colonels
in the organization. AFPC/DP3SP will approve exceptions in order to maintain integrity
in the Officer Evaluation System and to ensure fair and proper consideration is given to all
affected officers. (T-1) Note: The “Definitely Promote” Allocations are not adjusted
automatically in the Air Force Promotion Management System for any approved exception.
Calculations must be accomplished manually. (T-1) When submitting SRID changes after
the final allocation date, the request must be from an O-6/equivalent or above, who has
oversight of the MLR process. The request must provide justification as to why the
correction was not discovered within the time limit and what actions the management level
is implementing to ensure eligible officers are properly aligned prior to the PRF allocation
date. If multiple management levels are involved, the O-6/equivalent or above who has
oversight of the MLR process is required from each management level.
8.3.1.4. PRF Cutoff Date. This date is approximately 60 calendar days prior to the central
selection board. PRFs will not be signed prior to this date. (T-1)
8.3.1.5. Determining Air Force-Level Allocations.
8.3.1.5.1. Management levels determine the number of DP allocations they have by
applying the appropriate allocation rate to their IPZ or, if authorized, BPZ eligible
population. Management levels will round fractions up or down to the next whole
number as directed by AFPC with the publication of the Day 66 message. (T-1) The
allocation process to be used for a specific PRF cycle will be set and made public
approximately 120 days prior to the central selection board for each competitive
category. (T-1) AFPC will direct the MLR process that maintains the appropriate “P-
rate,” while minimizing the number of “Definitely Promote” recommendations
awarded to management levels who do not meet the minimum group size. (T-1)
Waiver requests are not authorized.
8.3.1.5.1.1. Example of the rounding up process: A management level has 462
IPZ eligible officers, and the allocation rate is 10%; the management level earns 47
“Definitely Promote” allocations (462 IPZ eligible officers x 10% allocation
rate=46.2 which rounds up to 47 allocations). The Air Force Promotion
Management System should be reviewed to determine “Definitely Promote”
allocations, but this does not preclude management levels from doing a manual
calculation.
8.3.1.5.1.2. Example of the rounding down process: A management level has IPZ
eligible officers, and the allocation rate is 10%; the management level earns 46
“Definitely Promote” allocations (462 IPZ eligible officers x 10% allocation
rate=46.2 which rounds down to 46 allocations). The remaining fraction will be
used at the HAF MLR for the specified competitive category. (T-1) The Air Force
262 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Promotion Management System should be reviewed to determine “Definitely
Promote” allocations, but this does not preclude management levels from doing a
manual calculation.
8.3.1.5.2. APZ officers do not generate separate allocations; however, if the
management level has only line of the Air Force APZ eligible officer(s), then a single
“Definitely Promote” recommendation is available when the management level is
authorized to round up. In this case, the APZ officers would receive a "0" in Section
VI on the PRF. Refer to Table 8.2.
8.3.1.5.3. Management levels receive separate allocations for in-utilization permanent
party students.
8.3.1.6. Determining Senior Rater Allocations.
8.3.1.6.1. Minimum group size for one “Definitely Promote” allocation is at least three
eligible, even if the “Definitely Promote” allocation rate is 50% or higher. See Table
8.3.
8.3.1.6.2. Management levels determine each senior rater’s share of allocations in the
same manner as discussed in paragraph 8.3.1.5.1, except instead of rounding up,
senior raters round down for all categories. Example: A 55% allocation rate applied
to a senior rater’s 10 IPZ captains would yield five “Definitely Promote” allocations
(10 IPZ eligible x 55% allocation rate = 5.5 which rounds down to 5 allocations).
8.3.1.7. Returning Allocations. Senior raters may return earned allocations to the
management level if they believe the quality of officers in their unit does not warrant the
full share of allocations. Additionally, any “Definitely Promote” recommendations
awarded by the senior rater to eligible officers that subsequently become ineligible is
returned to the senior rater which may be reallocated using the senior rater’s order of merit
or returned to the management level for distribution.
8.3.1.8. Redistributing “Definitely Promote” Allocations.
8.3.1.8.1. Prior to the MLR convening, if a senior rater chooses not to use the full quota
of “Definitely Promote” allocations, those unused go to the carry-over quota.
8.3.1.8.2. Following an MLR, the MLR owns all “Definitely Promote” allocations.
Any returned “Definitely Promote” allocations for IPZ/APZ eligible officers are
redistributed through the MLR carry-over process using the carry-over order of merit.
8.3.1.8.3. BTZ “Definitely Promote” allocations are redistributed at the next higher
level or through the MLR carry-over process.
8.3.1.8.4. Redistribution must occur prior to the PRF becoming a matter of record.
8.3.1.9. Carry-over. Since allocations are rounded down when applying the allocation rate
to a senior rater's eligible population, there are normally fractions of allocations remaining.
These fractions accrue at the management level and result in allocations called carry-over
“Definitely Promote” allocations. Carry-over allocations (and any returned allocations)
are awarded to account for variations of quality within organizations under the
management level. For IPZ or APZ officers, management levels distribute allocations to
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 263
MLRs for award. For BTZ eligible officers, they distribute carry-over allocations directly
to senior raters or through the MLR process.
8.3.1.10. Aggregation.
8.3.1.10.1. Senior raters without the minimum number IPZ or APZ officers assigned
to earn a “Definitely Promote” recommendation in their (senior rater’s) own right may
compete their officers for “Definitely Promote” recommendations through aggregation.
Grouping of all such officers and the application of the allocation rate yields, after
rounding down, the number of definitely promote allocations available to officers
competing in aggregation. Example: If there are two senior raters in a given
management level with eligible officers, and each senior rater has only one eligible
officer, and the “Definitely Promote” allocation rate is 65%, then:
1 eligible x 65% = 0.65+ 1 eligible x 65% = 0.65 management level total = 1.30
Note: After rounding down, the management level earns 1 “Definitely Promote”
recommendation to award in aggregation and transfers the remaining .30 to carry-over.
8.3.1.10.2. Senior raters without the minimum number of BTZ officers assigned to
earn an allocation aggregate their officers to the next higher senior rater in the rating
chain until the number of eligible is large enough to earn at least one allocation.
8.3.1.10.3. Senior raters below the head of the management level who award BTZ
“Definitely Promote” recommendations to eligible officers aggregated from
subordinate senior raters' populations must make the promotion recommendation
decision without convening a board or panel of subordinates.
8.3.1.10.3.1. If aggregation proceeds to the management level to satisfy the
requirements of paragraph 8.3.1.10.2, the head of the management level may:
8.3.1.10.3.1.1. Personally distribute “Definitely Promote” allocations on their
own.
8.3.1.10.3.1.2. Convene MLRs to award the “Definitely Promote” allocations
based on order of merit.
8.3.1.10.3.1.3. For joint management levels, all PRFs, including BTZ, must be
quality reviewed. (T-1) See paragraph 8.3.2.4.2.2.
8.3.1.10.4. If the total number of line BTZ officers aggregated to the MLR is still too
small to earn a “Definitely Promote” allocation, all panel members, not just those with
officers competing for aggregation, score the records of the officers in the aggregated
group and may award one “Definitely Promote” recommendation. If awarded, this
“Definitely Promote” allocation will come from the carry-over allocation.
8.3.2. Management Level Review Requirements:
8.3.2.1. General. Management levels designate the organization or agency responsible for
holding a review. The commander or head of the designated organization holds the MLR
and may establish more than one MLR (e.g., at the numbered Air Force level or center
level). If the head of the management level is the sole senior rater, there is no MLR, and
the completed PRFs are forwarded to the Air Force MLR for quality review. However, if
264 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
the PRF cycle for the specific competitive category is determined for management levels
to round down, the sole senior rater may nominate the officer to the Air Force MLR for
consideration.
8.3.2.2. Timing and functions. Conduct MLRs 40-60 calendar days before the central
selection board. They have five functions: (1) to quality review all I/APZ PRFs; (2) to
award “Definitely Promote” recommendations to those officers whose senior rater had too
few eligible to earn a “Definitely Promote” allocation; (3) to award carry-over “Definitely
Promote” allocations available to the management level; (4) to award “Definitely Promote”
allocations to management level students; and (5) to nominate officers from their
management level to compete for “Definitely Promote” allocations available at the Air
Force MLR.
8.3.2.3. Board composition. Is comprised of the president (must be an Air Force officer),
those senior raters who have either awarded a “Definitely Promote” recommendation or
have officers competing for aggregation or carry-over “Definitely Promote”
recommendations, a functional representative from the category under consideration (if no
participating senior rater is from the specific category), and a non-voting recorder
designated by the commander or head of the organization responsible for conducting the
MLR. (T-1) Note: No officer eligible for a particular board will be involved with the
process for that particular board. (T-1)
8.3.2.3.1. The head of the management level designates the MLR president. The
president must be an AF general officer when evaluating lieutenant colonels, and at
least an AF colonel when evaluating majors and below.
8.3.2.3.2. In cases where senior raters are not available to serve on the panel due to
some extraordinary circumstance, the head of the management level may authorize
senior raters to designate senior officials who meet the minimum grade requirement (a
general officer or equivalent when evaluating lieutenant colonels or at least a colonel
or equivalent when evaluating majors and below) from their organization or higher
chain-of-command to serve on their behalf.
8.3.2.3.3. If extraordinary circumstances require a senior rater’s departure during the
MLR, the MLR president or another senior rater, as designated by the affected senior
rater, may represent the departing senior rater. In all cases, the MLR president or senior
rater designated to represent another group of officers is still limited to one vote.
Additionally, if extraordinary circumstances require the MLR president to depart
during a review, the head of the management level will designate another president or
assume the presidency. In these cases, the records already scored will remain and the
MLR will continue.
8.3.2.3.4. Management levels may establish a representative sample of senior raters to
conduct the quality review of the I/APZ PRFs and officers’ OCSRGs at the MLR. At
the discretion of the management level, all senior raters who awarded a “Definitely
Promote” recommendation or who are competing officers for a “Definitely Promote”
recommendation do not need to participate in the quality review process at the MLR.
8.3.2.3.4.1. All senior raters with eligible officers competing for an aggregate
“Definitely Promote” allocation must serve as a member of the MLR during the
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 265
aggregation phase. However, in those cases where senior raters are not available
to serve on the MLR due to some extraordinary circumstance, the MLR president
may authorize senior raters to designate senior officials (a general review or
equivalent when evaluating lieutenant colonels or at least a colonel or equivalent
when evaluating majors and below) from their organization or higher chain of
command to serve on their behalf. If necessary, the MLR president may represent
those senior raters, however the MLR president is still limited to one vote. If during
the MLR a senior rater must be excused, the senior rater may designate another
senior rater already attending the MLR or the MLR president to act on their behalf;
however, the MLR president or another senior rater which was designated is still
limited to one vote.
8.3.2.3.4.2. When practical, all senior raters competing officers for carry-over
“Definitely Promotes” attend the MLR. If the management level determines this is
not practical or deems it otherwise appropriate, it may establish a representative
sample of senior raters to award carry-over “Definitely Promote”
recommendations. The management level uses a representative sample to ensure
the senior raters selected do not score the records of officers for whom they are the
senior rater. Note: In all cases, at least one representative will be from the
competitive category under consideration and must be a scoring member of the
MLR. (T-1)
8.3.2.4. Management Level Review Preparation.
8.3.2.4.1. Management Levels.
8.3.2.4.1.1. Establish MLRs.
8.3.2.4.1.2. Distribute aggregation and carry-over “Definitely Promote”
allocations to the MLR.
8.3.2.4.1.3. Notify each senior rater of the number of officers they may submit to
compete for carry-over allocations subject to limits established by the management
level.
8.3.2.4.1.4. Ensure MLRs are completed no earlier than 60 or no later than 40
calendar days before convening of the central selection board for which the PRFs
are prepared.
8.3.2.4.1.5. Determine the location of the MLR (normally held where performance
records on the officers being considered are available).
8.3.2.4.1.6. Ensure the officer’s OCSRG and DQHB for each officer are available
for the review.
8.3.2.4.1.7. Ensure the MLR president is provided a listing of eligible officers,
identifying those with personnel information files, letters of reprimand, and/or
Articles 15s. MLR presidents use this listing at their discretion to ensure senior
raters (and MLR members, when appropriate) have considered this information
when preparing promotion recommendation forms.
8.3.2.4.1.8. Establish scoring procedure for MLRs.
266 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
8.3.2.4.2. MLR Purpose and Process:
8.3.2.4.2.1. Ensure senior raters do not exceed their share of “Definitely Promote”
recommendations.
8.3.2.4.2.2. Ensure all BTZ records are reviewed separately from I/APZ eligible
records.
8.3.2.4.2.3. Quality review the OCSRGs, DQHBs, and PRFs of all I/APZ officers
in order to identify and discuss with appropriate senior raters those PRFs that appear
to contain exaggerated or unrealistic comments or comments that do not appear to
support the overall recommendation based on the OCSRGs and information
considered according to paragraph 1.12. Note: “Definitely Promote”
recommendations are limited in number to ensure that only the best qualified
records are endorsed. A “Definitely Promote” recommendation sends a strong
signal to the central selection board that this officer is ready for immediate
promotion. If a senior rater or head of the management level does not have officers
fitting this definition, a “Definitely Promote” recommendation should not be
awarded even though “Definitely Promote” allocations may be available. To award
“Definitely Promote” allocations to BTZ eligible officers when the record does not
support a “Definitely Promote” recommendation, it gives the officer unrealistic
feedback and sends mixed signals to the central selection board.
8.3.2.4.2.4. Award “Definitely Promote” recommendations to officers aggregated
from senior raters within their jurisdiction with less than minimum group size
needed to award “Definitely Promote” recommendations.
8.3.2.4.2.5. Award carry-over “Definitely Promote” recommendations based on
the Management Level’s allocations available or to nominate to the Air Force MLR
for aggregation or carry-over as appropriate.
8.3.2.4.3. Senior Raters:
8.3.2.4.3.1. Serve as members of the MLR.
8.3.2.4.3.2. Submit PRFs to the MLR on all I/APZ officers including officers
competing for aggregation and carry-over “Definitely Promote” recommendations.
Note: Since BTZ records are not required to be quality reviewed, senior raters
must submit their BTZ PRFs to the management level for updating.
8.3.2.4.3.3. Submit to the MLR recorder a single list of the names of their I/APZ
officers. For those officers on the list with completed PRFs, include name and
overall promotion recommendation; for those officers on the list submitted to
compete for aggregation or carry-over, indicate whether competing for aggregation
or carry-over “Definitely Promote” recommendations by annotating an “A” for
aggregation or “C” for carryover.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 267
8.3.2.5. Review Procedures.
8.3.2.5.1. General Procedures.
8.3.2.5.1.1. For all MLRs, the recorder provides to the MLR president the total
number of “Definitely Promote” recommendations to be awarded by each senior
rater.
8.3.2.5.1.2. The MLR president ensures no senior rater exceeds the allowable
number of “Definitely Promote” recommendations. If a senior rater has awarded
more “Definitely Promote” recommendations than allowed, the senior rater
specifies which PRFs need correction, new PRFs are prepared, and the senior rater
completes Sections IX and X.
8.3.2.5.1.2.1. If the senior rater does not specify which PRFs need correcting,
the panel reviews the OCSRG and DQHB of all officers assigned to that senior
rater to determine which overall recommendations need changing. The panel
then prepares a new PRF, with Sections I through VIII copied verbatim from
the original PRF submitted by the senior rater.
8.3.2.5.1.2.2. The MLR president marks the "Promote" block in section IX of
the re-accomplished PRF and signs the form. Note: The president will leave
Section IX blank when the officer competes under aggregation or carry-over.
8.3.2.5.1.2.3. The panel will change the minimum number of PRFs required to
ensure compliance with prescribed “Definitely Promote” limits.
8.3.2.5.1.2.4. The records of any officer whose PRF is re-accomplished under
this provision will automatically compete for carry-over “Definitely Promote”
recommendations.
8.3.2.5.2. PRF Review. MLR members will review the OCSRGs, DQHBs, and
completed PRFs of all I/APZ officers assigned to a senior rater as a group. If the MLR
believes a “Definitely Promote” recommendation is unsupported by the ratee's
OCSRG, they discuss this with the senior rater. Open discussion among MLR members
is encouraged. In all cases, a senior rater has the final authority to determine the content
of the PRFs they prepare (unless the content is inappropriate in accordance with
paragraph 1.12 of this instruction), and to award “Definitely Promote”
recommendations allocated by the management level.
8.3.2.5.3. Aggregation and Carry-over. The MLR assesses the relative merit of
OCSRGs of competitors for aggregation and carry-over “Definitely Promote”
recommendations. This is by a combination of numerical scoring and open discussion
among panel members. The MLR must ensure consistent and equitable procedures
apply to the OCSRG of each officer. The scores of all MLR members are totaled, rank-
ordered, and “Definitely Promote” recommendations awarded. If two or more records
tie, and there are insufficient numbers of Definitely Promote recommendations to
award one to each, the MLR president will determine an appropriate method for
breaking the tie.
8.3.2.5.4. Procedures for Award of I/APZ Aggregation Definitely Promote
Recommendations:
268 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
8.3.2.5.4.1. Officers submitted to compete for aggregation “Definitely Promote”
recommendations compete among themselves. The MLR president and only those
senior raters with officers competing under aggregation will review and score the
OCSRGs of these officers.
8.3.2.5.4.2. If the total number of IPZ officers aggregated to the MLR is still too
small to earn a “Definitely Promote” allocation, all panel members, not just those
with officers competing for aggregation, will score the records of the officers in the
aggregated group. (T-1) If authorized to round up for the specific category, the
management level may award one “Definitely Promote” recommendation. If
awarded, this “Definitely Promote” allocation will come from the carry over
allocations. (T-1) If only authorized to round down, then the management level
may nominate to the Air Force management level to compete for a “Definitely
Promote” allocation.
8.3.2.5.4.3. After all records are reviewed and scored and the MLR has awarded
the “Definitely Promote” recommendations, senior raters, or their designated
representatives, complete Section IX on the PRFs for their officers. The MLR
president verifies the results of the completed MLR by signing the order of merit.
Senior raters may make any changes to the PRF as a result of the MLR (e.g., if the
last line states, “my next Definitely Promote” and the officer received a “Definitely
Promote” recommendation from the MLR then the senior rater should change the
last line).
8.3.2.5.4.4. The records of officers from the aggregated group that did not receive
a “Definitely Promote” recommendation may compete for carry-over “Definitely
Promote” recommendations at the discretion of the senior rater, within the limits
prescribed by the management level.
8.3.2.5.5. Procedures for Award of I/APZ Carry-over Definitely Promote
Recommendations:
8.3.2.5.5.1. At the MLR’s discretion, and subject to the limit of “Definitely
Promote” allocations available in the carry-over phase, those officers who do not
receive a “Definitely Promote” recommendation from aggregation will be
submitted for carry-over “Definitely Promote” recommendations. Note: This is
based on the order of merit from the aggregation phase.
8.3.2.5.5.2. Normally, the MLR president and all senior raters with officers
competing for carry-over recommendations participate in the carry-over decision.
Exception: See paragraph 8.3.2.3.3. At the discretion of the MLR president,
other senior raters available may also participate in carry-over decisions.
8.3.2.5.5.3. Senior raters or their designated representatives complete Section IX
on PRFs for their officers by marking either a “Definitely Promote” or a “Promote”
as appropriate. The MLR president verifies the results of the MLR by signing the
order of merit. Senior raters may make any changes to the PRF as a result of the
MLR (e.g., if the last line states, “my next Definitely Promote” and the officer
received a “Definitely Promote” recommendation from the MLR then the senior
rater should change the last line).
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 269
8.3.2.5.6. Recorder Responsibilities. The MLR recorder forwards all PRFs and
annotated MELs to the personnel activity responsible for updating the Air Force
Promotion Management System. Note: No officer eligible for a particular board will
be involved with the PRF process for that particular board.
8.3.3. Officers Assigned Outside the DOD and to Other Military Departments.
8.3.3.1. Air Force officers in these categories require special provisions because their
organizations of assignment do not fall within the jurisdiction of a management level.
8.3.3.1.1. Allocation Process. For these officers, the Air Force District of Washington
acts as the management level. The responsibilities of Air Force District of Washington
are the same as those in paragraph 8.1.4.3, except for aggregated BTZ officers. The
HAF MLR (as described in paragraph 8.3.3.3) evaluates BTZ officers aggregated to
the highest senior in the rating chain for whom the senior rater does not have the
minimum group size required to receive an allocation.
8.3.3.1.2. Promotion Recommendation Form (PRFs). Senior rater submitting officers
to compete for aggregation or carry-over “Definitely Promote” recommendations
prepare and forward PRFs to Air Force District of Washington, leaving Section IX
blank.
8.3.3.2. HAF Review.
8.3.3.2.1. The AFDW/CC facilitates the HAF MLR to convene 40 to 60 calendar days
before the central selection board for which the PRFs are prepared. The AF/CV, or
officer designated by the AF/CC, serves as the MLR president. The Air Force District
of Washington Commander with the assistance of AF/A1, selects a minimum of four
members, consistent with the minimum grade requirements for senior raters, to serve
as members (one must be from the competitive category being considered). (T-1)
8.3.3.2.2. The HAF MLR will review all completed I/APZ and BTZ PRFs and award
aggregation and carry-over “Definitely Promote” recommendations. Air Force District
of Washington is responsible for providing senior raters copies of completed PRFs on
their ratees. This MLR will also review all PRFs completed by sole senior raters (see
definition of sole senior rater in this instruction).
8.3.3.2.3. The recorder consolidates information on the number of BTZ officers
assigned, the number of BTZ “Definitely Promote” recommendations available, and
the number of “Definitely Promote” recommendations awarded. Note: No officer
eligible for a particular board will be involved with the PRF process for that particular
board.
8.3.3.2.4. If, during the review of completed PRFs, the board discovers that a senior
rater awarded more “Definitely Promote” recommendations than allowed, the MLR
president discusses this with the senior rater.
8.3.3.2.4.1. After the senior rater decides which PRFs to correct, they forward the
re-accomplished PRFs to the MLR by the most expeditious means.
8.3.3.2.4.2. If the senior rater does not specify which PRFs need correcting, the
panel reviews the OCSRG, the DQHB, and the career brief of all officers assigned
to that senior rater to determine which overall recommendations need changing.
270 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
The panel then prepares a new PRF, with Sections I through VIII copied verbatim
from the original PRF submitted by the senior rater. The MLR president marks the
"Promote" block in section IX of the re-accomplished PRFs and signs Section X.
8.3.3.2.4.3. The MLR holds PRFs they re-accomplish pending receipt of a re-
accomplished PRF from the senior rater. If they receive the senior rater’s re-
accomplished PRF before MLR conclusion, the re-accomplished PRF is submitted
to the MLR for review. If the MLR has concluded, the PRF is re-accomplished by
the panel president, submitted to Air Force District of Washington and the original
submitted by the senior rater will be destroyed. The management level will then
process the PRF as appropriate.
8.3.3.2.5. Award of “Definitely Promote” recommendations to I/APZ officers is
always separate and distinct from award of “Definitely Promote” recommendations to
BTZ officers.
8.3.3.2.6. The MLR president completes PRFs with Section IX left blank.
8.3.3.2.7. Since panel members may not be senior raters for the officers meeting the
MLR, members are encouraged to discuss an officer’s OCSRG and current
performance with the senior rater in any case where the panel members believe it
necessary.
8.3.4. Joint Management Level Reviews.
8.3.4.1. Evaluation Reviews. The president of a panel held to evaluate Joint officers is
always an Air Force general officer. Joint management levels may exercise one of two
options: 1) hold their own reviews, or 2) allow the HAF MLR to evaluate their officers.
If the Joint management level is the sole senior rater, the HAF MLR will review all
completed Joint management level sole senior rater PRFs.
8.3.4.2. PRF. When senior raters submit officers to compete at the HAF MLR, Section IX
of the PRF is left blank.
8.3.4.3. If the management level chooses to hold a review but there is no Air Force general
officer assigned to the activity, the management level may obtain the assistance of an Air
Force general officer assigned to another activity. If necessary, the HAF/A1 will assist the
management level in obtaining a general officer to serve as the president.
8.3.4.3.1. Senior raters submit to the panel all I/APZ completed PRFs as well as the
PRFs (Section IX blank) on all IPZ and APZ officers submitted to compete for
aggregation or carry-over “Definitely Promote” recommendations.
8.3.4.3.2. The responsibilities and procedures of joint reviews are the same as in
paragraph 8.3.2, regardless of recommendation, to be reviewed by a MLR (joint MLR
hosted by an Air Force general officer or HAF MLR). This is to ensure Air Force
officers in a joint environment are getting an Air Force look.
8.3.5. Officers Assigned as Permanent Party Students.
8.3.5.1. Management Level Students - officers assigned as permanent party students
training in their utilization field to include TDY in a training status. In-utilization training
includes any follow-on, specialized, requalification, upgrade, enhancement, or broadening
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 271
training in the officer’s utilization field. Management levels receive separate allocations
based on those populations since permanent party eligible and students must be evaluated
as two distinct categories. For both I/APZ line of the Air Force permanent party students,
allocations round up at the management level and down at the senior rater level. For I/APZ
non-line permanent party students, allocations round down. BPZ non-line/LAF-J
permanent party student allocations round up at the management level and down at the
senior rater level. Evaluation procedures are the same as outlined in paragraph 8.3.2.5.
Responsibilities of the management level with regard to students are the same as those in
paragraph 8.3.2.4.1.
8.3.5.2. AF-Level Students - officers assigned as permanent party students training outside
their utilization field. Outside utilization training includes developmental education,
degree-granting programs (usually Air Force Institute of Technology sponsored), language
training, education with industry programs, attaché/designate training, MC/DC residency
programs (when a new Air Force specialty code or suffix is awarded upon completion of
training or when determined by the competitive category functional representatives),
internships, and initial qualification training into a new utilization field.
8.3.5.2.1. AFPC/DPMSPE acts as the management level for AF level students and
receives “Definitely Promote” allocations based on the number of IPZ officers eligible
for consideration by the HAF student MLR discussed in paragraph 8.3.5.2. The
allocation rate is applied to students, patients, and missing-in-action/prisoners of war
separately and rounded up at the management level.
8.3.5.2.2. Air Force Student Management Level Review. Convened at the direction of
AF/A1, considers all officers who are permanent party students, patients, and those
missing in action/prisoners of war within each separate category. It convenes
approximately 70 calendar days prior to the central selection board. AF/A1 designates
the MLR president and a minimum of four MLR members consistent with the minimum
grade requirements for senior raters (one member must be from the category under
consideration). (T-1) The MLR is responsible for the following:
8.3.5.2.2.1. Reviewing the OCSRGs, DQHBs, career briefs, and narrative-only
PRFs.
8.3.5.2.2.2. Scoring all I/APZ records and awarding “Definitely Promote”
recommendations based on the allocation rate prescribed for that competitive
category, grade and zone.
8.3.5.2.2.3. Scoring records and Awarding Promotion Recommendations.
8.3.5.2.2.4. Awarding all Promotion Recommendations. There are no separate
procedures to award aggregation and carry-over allocations.
8.3.5.2.2.5. Ensuring the recommendation-only PRF is accomplished for each
officer, the appropriate recommendation in Section IX is marked, the PRF is signed
by the MLR, and is attached to the narrative-only PRF.
8.3.5.2.2.6. Ensuring ratees receive a copy of the completed recommendation-only
and the attached narrative-only PRFs. Note: These are distributed per paragraph
8.1.4.2.13.
272 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
8.3.5.3. Writing Letters to Air Force Student Management Level Review.
8.3.5.3.1. AF-level students eligible for promotion may write a letter to the Air Force
student MLR. The submitter must:
8.3.5.3.1.1. Submit the letter in good faith and ensure it contains accurate
information to the best of their knowledge. (T-3)
8.3.5.3.1.2. Sign and date the letter. (T-3)
8.3.5.3.1.3. Send the letter to AFPC/DPMSPE so it arrives no later than the 5 duty
days prior to the MLR convening date. The MLR will not consider letters that
arrive on or after the convening date. Address letters to: Calendar Year (insert
appropriate year and grade) USAF Student Management Level Review,
AFPC/DPMSPE. Letters may be faxed, emailed, or mailed but must have an actual
signed signature (i.e., payroll signature). (T-3)
8.3.5.3.1.4. If requesting return of the letter, provide a stamped self-addressed
envelope. Otherwise, the letter will be destroyed upon conclusion of the student
MLR. Letters will not be forwarded to the central selection board. (T-3)
8.3.5.3.2. AFPC/DPMSPE advises officers when letters do not meet the above
requirements and either returns or destroys the letter.
8.3.5.3.3. Letters on behalf of other officers are not permitted (to clarify, eligible
officers may provide letters as attachments to their letter; however, a stand-alone letter
cannot be submitted on their behalf).
8.3.5.3.4. The following attachments are not permitted: documents that can become
a permanent part of the officer's selection folder (e.g., PRFs considered by previous
central selection boards, unsigned officer evaluations and training reports, decoration
narratives, or letters of evaluation which become part of the permanent record).
8.3.6. Air-Force-Level Management Level Review (Aggregation and Carryover). This
convenes when the rounding down process is used (see paragraph 8.3.1.5.1.2.). Officers
compete for promotion by competitive category. Each competitive category may be different
and competes only within the category and only when the category rounds down at the
management levels. Due to the relatively small number of officers in each of these competitive
categories, the number of eligible officers under a senior rater will frequently be insufficient
to receive a “Definitely Promote” allocation, as is often the case even when officers aggregate
to the management level.
8.3.6.1. Promotion Recommendation Forms. Section IX is blank on PRFs for officers
submitted by the MLR to the Air Force MLR. The Air Force MLR president completes
Section IX with either a “Definitely Promote” or “Promote” recommendation. Section VI
(Group Size) will always be “N/A”. (T-1)
8.3.6.2. A MLR and/or the HAF MLR may evaluate I/APZ for all categories.
8.3.6.3. Air Force Management Level Review.
8.3.6.3.1. This panel considers those officers aggregated from management levels
recommended to compete for aggregate and carry-over “Definitely Promote”
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 273
recommendations. AFPC convenes these reviews at AFPC approximately 30 calendar
days before the central selection board.
8.3.6.3.2. Composition: President (an Air Force officer) and a minimum of four
members as designated by AF/A1, or designated representative, consistent with the
minimum grade requirements, where possible. The competitive category under
consideration will not form the majority of MLR membership. (T-1) For MLRs, no
more than two members may come from the competitive category under consideration.
The remaining members will be from competitive categories not under consideration.
(T-1)
8.3.6.3.3. AFPC/DPMSPE limits the number of officers each management level may
submit to compete for aggregate and carry-over allocations to the total number of
“Definitely Promote” allocations available. AFPC/DPMSPE ensures the OCSRG,
DQHB, career brief, and PRF on each officer being submitted are available for review
and holds an Air Force MLR for each competitive category.
8.3.6.3.4. MLR responsibilities are the same as discussed in paragraph 8.3.2.4.
8.4. Special Provisions (applies to ADL officers only).
8.4.1. Officers Relocating During the PRF Process. To ensure officers with a PCA or PCS
assignment to a new senior rater effective after the PRF accounting date, but on or before the
PRF cutoff date, receive full consideration for a “Definitely Promote” recommendation, special
provisions apply. The gaining senior rater considers all eligible officers (except patients)
regardless of promotion zone, who have a date arrived station (in MilPDS) effective after the
PRF accounting date, but on or before the PRF cutoff date, for a “Definitely Promote”
recommendation. For similar rules on promotion-eligible colonels. See paragraph 8.6.2.
8.4.1.1. The losing senior rater’s total number of eligible always includes officers in this
category when determining the losing senior rater’s share of “Definitely Promote”
allocations. As a result, the losing senior rater is responsible for preparing PRFs and
ensuring a quality review is completed.
8.4.1.2. Do not adjust the gaining senior rater’s number of “Definitely Promote”
allocations to include officers in this category. Take any “Definitely Promote”
recommendations awarded by a gaining senior rater from available allocations already
established by the gaining senior rater’s management level.
8.4.1.3. To provide these officers fair consideration, the losing and gaining senior raters
may discuss the officers’ performance and their intentions (via phone, memo, etc.).
8.4.1.4. The Gaining Senior Rater:
8.4.1.4.1. Must consider only eligible officers who will be given an outright “Promote”
recommendation by their losing senior rater. Gaining senior raters have no option to
award an outright “Definitely Promote,” nor can they nominate newly assigned officers
for aggregation or carry-over consideration when the losing senior rater nominates
them to the aggregation or carry-over process regardless of the outcome from the MLR.
8.4.1.4.2. Must consider all newly assigned officers who received a “Promote”
recommendation on their PRF from the HAF student MLR. Eligible officers
considered by the HAF student MLR are not competed in aggregation or carryover;
274 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
therefore, the gaining senior raters may award an outright “Definitely Promote,” or
compete the officer(s) in aggregation and/or carry-over.
8.4.1.4.3. Will accomplish a new PRF only if this provision is authorized in accordance
with paragraph 8.4.1.4.1. The newly accomplished PRF will contain the gaining
SRID in Section VIII of the PRF and complete ratee identification data, unit mission
description, and job description as of the date arrived station (PCS) or duty effective
date (PCA) to the gaining senior rater. Note: If the gaining senior rater is unable to
obtain a “Definitely Promote” recommendation, either outright or by
aggregation/carryover, then the accomplished PRF is destroyed and the original PRF
accomplished by the losing senior rater will be used for the central selection board.
8.4.1.5. The gaining senior rater will exercise the following options, as appropriate:
8.4.1.5.1. Decide to take no action to submit an individual for a “Definitely Promote”
recommendation.
8.4.1.5.2. Award a “Definitely Promote” recommendation from earned allocations.
8.4.1.5.3. Submit I/APZ officers to compete for aggregation and carry-over.
8.4.1.5.4. Award a “Do Not Promote This Board” recommendation when substantiated
derogatory information has been received since departure from previous assignment if
time does not allow for not-qualified-for-promotion action processing. This is
considered a “Stop File” (see paragraph 8.5) and must be submitted in writing through
the management level to AFPC/DPMSPE. Gaining senior raters must get the
concurrence of the gaining MLR president and ensure the losing senior rater is
informed of the “Do Not Promote This Board” action. This will allow the opportunity
for possible redistribution of any previously awarded “Definitely Promote”
recommendations to other deserving officers prior to the central selection board.
8.4.1.6. If the gaining senior rater submits an officer for an aggregation or carry-over
“Definitely Promote” recommendation, the gaining senior rater must ensure the officer's
record of performance is available.
8.4.1.7. The gaining senior rater should notify the losing senior rater of their intentions.
8.4.1.8. The management level will:
8.4.1.8.1. Ensure consideration of all officers in this category for promotion
recommendation and manage all necessary actions to ensure full consideration by the
losing and gaining senior raters.
8.4.1.8.2. Work with MPFs to notify senior raters of their eligible officers who fall in
this category to ensure consideration for a definitely promote recommendation, as
outlined in paragraph 8.4.
8.4.1.8.3. Notify AFPC/DPMSPE when a gaining senior rater awards a “Definitely
Promote” recommendation or “Do Not Promote This Board” recommendation. This
includes those awarded within a management level as a result of a PCA action. This is
considered a “Stop File” under paragraph 8.4 (commonly known as old guy/new guy)
circumstances and must be in writing in accordance with paragraph 8.5.
8.4.1.8.4. Ensure allocations are not adjusted to account for officers in this category.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 275
8.4.1.9. The Military Personnel Flight (MPF) will:
8.4.1.9.1. Screen all officers gained after the PRF accounting date to determine
eligibility and notify senior raters accordingly. Ensure senior raters certify a review of
all gained eligible officers by signing the old guy/new report on individual personnel
or projected MEL which is generated from the Air Force Promotion Management
System.
8.4.1.9.2. Notify the Management Level of newly assigned officers whose SRID is not
correct as soon as possible; monitor date arrived station for changes (resulting from
finance office updates) that would necessitate a correction to the SRID.
8.4.1.9.3. Provide the senior rater an OCSRG and DQHB on newly assigned members.
8.4.1.10. AFPC/DPMSPE will:
8.4.1.10.1. Update all “Definitely Promote” and “Do Not Promote This Board”
recommendations awarded by gaining senior raters and update inter-command SRID
changes upon “Stop File” requests from management levels.
8.4.1.10.2. Receive definitely promote PRFs accomplished by the gaining senior rater
through the “Stop File” process. If the losing and gaining senior rater both award the
same overall recommendation, the PRF from the gaining senior rater is destroyed.
8.4.2. Officers Added to or Deleted from Promotion Eligibility. This paragraph applies to
officers who become eligible or ineligible for promotion consideration in a particular
competitive category on or after the PRF allocation date. Causes for a change in eligibility
status may include: SSB or AFBCMR actions, administrative errors, changes in dates of
separation, or similar circumstances.
8.4.2.1. When an officer is added to a central selection board or changes promotion zone
eligibility, the senior rater:
8.4.2.1.1. Prepares a PRF without a restriction as to the type of recommendation
awarded, since there are no adjustments made to allocations of definitely promote
recommendations on or after the PRF allocation date.
8.4.2.1.2. Only awards definitely promote recommendations to officers whose
OCSRG and DQHB are comparable to other officers who received “Definitely
Promote” recommendations during the normal PRF process.
8.4.2.1.3. Completes PRFs according to Table 8.1 (except section VI, Group Size). In
this section, enter a "1" for IPZ officers and a "0" for AP officers. Note: Group size
for non-line/LAF-J is always “N/A.”
8.4.2.1.4. Either recommends or does not recommend the officer for promotion, if the
promotion opportunity is 100%. A PRF is required only for officers who are not
recommended for promotion.
8.4.2.2. Senior raters void PRFs completed on officers subsequently deleted from
promotion eligibility following the PRF allocation date. When a PRF is voided and an
outright definitely promote was awarded, senior raters may reallocate “Definitely
Promote” recommendations to other officers and re-accomplish PRFs. See paragraph
276 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
8.3.1.8.2 for disposition of “Definitely Promote” recommendations after the MLR
convenes. The appropriate MLR must approve changes to I/APZ.
8.4.2.3. When an officer's zone of eligibility for promotion changes (e.g., from IPZ to
APZ), the above provisions apply. Senior raters prepare a new PRF as appropriate to reflect
the officer's correct promotion zone and void the old PRF.
8.4.3. Prisoners, Deserters, and Officers on Appellate Leave. Do not accomplish PRFs for
officers who become prisoners or deserters, or who are on appellate leave on or before the PRF
accounting date. Notify AFPC/DPMSPE through the management level to have these officers
removed from the senior rater MEL unless the status is after the PRF accounting date.
AFPC/DPMSPE prepares a board-specific DAF Form 77 for ADL officers who fall into this
category and places it into their selection record. However, officers identified as prisoners,
deserters, or on appellate leave after the PRF accounting date will require PRFs from the losing
senior rater. The senior rater’s total number of eligible officers will include these officers when
determining “Definitely Promote” allocations.
8.4.4. Officers Eligible for Promotion when the Promotion Opportunity is 100%. When the
promotion opportunity for any grade is 100%, senior raters will prepare PRFs only on officers
who receive “Do Not Promote This Board” recommendation or on a “Promote”
recommendation with derogatory information (e.g., Article 15, referral evaluation, letter of
reprimand) filed in their OSRs. Exceptions to this rule can be addressed to AFPC/DPMSPE.
Senior raters will annotate one the MEL with either a “P” (for “Promote” recommendations)
or “N” (for “Do Not Promote This Board” recommendations) and forward the MEL and PRFs
to the management level. Management levels will review all “Do Not Promote This Board”
promotion recommendations, update the Air Force Promotion Management System to show
either “Promote” or “N” (not recommended for promotion), and forward any completed PRFs
and MELs, signed by the MLR president, to arrive at AFPC/DPMSPE no later than 30 calendar
days prior to the board start date. Management levels may use a representative sample of
senior raters to evaluate “Do Not Promote This Board” recommendations.
8.4.5. Officers Assigned to Units Above the Management Level. Officers assigned directly
to the offices of the CSAF, SecAF, CJCS, SECDEF, VPOTUS, or POTUS, with that individual
as their direct reporting official, are above the management level, require special provisions
because they do not fall within the usual jurisdiction of a management level. These select units
generally have few promotion eligible officers for most boards.
8.4.5.1. Allocation Process. To ensure these officers receive full and fair consideration,
the individual above the management level unit acts as the management level and receives
separate “Definitely Promote” allocations for IPZ officers assigned. Since there is no
opportunity for this small pocket of quality officers to aggregate up or compete for carry-
over, the above the management level heads are authorized to award additional “Definitely
Promote” recommendations.
8.4.5.2. Promotion Recommendation Forms (PRF). The above the management level
heads are sole senior raters and must prepare PRFs on all promotion eligible officers under
consideration by the appropriate central selection board. They award all PRF
recommendations.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 277
8.4.5.3. Management Level Review (MLR). Since the above the management level heads
are sole senior raters, they do not conduct MLRs; the PRFs are forwarded to the HAF MLR
(Air Force District of Washington) for a quality review only.
8.5. Correction of Promotion Recommendation Forms (PRF) (ADL Officers) (“Stop File”
process). A PRF is considered a working copy until the start of the central selection board. If the
PRF is not a matter of record, senior raters have the flexibility to change PRFs. Note: All changes
to PRFs should be completed no later than 2 weeks prior to the central selection board. However,
in extreme circumstances and on a case-by-case basis, AFPC/DPMSPE may approve changes up
to one duty day prior to the central selection board. The request must be from an O-6/equivalent
or above, who has oversight of the MLR process and justification as to why the correction was not
discovered within the time limit.
8.5.1. For typographical errors, concurrence by the MLR president is not required. For content
changes, MLR president concurrence is necessary. The following steps should be followed:
8.5.1.1. Senior rater contacts the management level to discuss the issue. The management
level will notify AFPC/DPMSPE to place an immediate “Stop File” on the affected
officer’s PRF(s) with written communication, identifying the change, (fax, email, and
letter) within 24 hours of initial notification.
8.5.1.2. The senior rater must notify the affected officer (in writing, or, if verbal, follow-
up in writing) of the intent to change the PRF.
8.5.1.3. The senior rater forwards the corrected PRF to the management level and provides
a copy to the officer.
8.5.1.4. The management level forwards the corrected PRF to AFPC/DPMSPE.
8.5.2. If the change to the PRF serves to weaken the narrative portion, is a negative content
change, or a downgrade in the overall rating, the MLR process that the original PRF met must
be re-accomplished. In addition to the steps above, the officer must be provided a copy of the
re-accomplished PRF and a letter, similar to the letter provided to an officer who receives a
“Do Not Promote This Board” recommendation, stating the officer’s right to write a letter to
the central selection board.
8.5.3. Correction of PRFs (ResAF Officers) (“Stop File” Process). A PRF is considered a
working copy until the start of the central selection board. If the PRF is not a matter of record,
senior raters have the flexibility to change PRFs. Note: All changes to PRFs should be
completed NLT two weeks prior to the central selection board. However, in extreme
circumstances, and on a case-by-case basis, ARPC/PB may approve changes up to one duty
day prior to the central selection board. The request must be from the senior rater (in writing
or, if verbal, follow-up in writing/electronic mail within 24 hours of initial notification).
8.5.3.1. The senior rater must notify the affected officer (in writing or, if verbal, follow-
up in writing) of the intent to change the PRF.
8.5.3.2. If the change to the PRF serves to weaken the narrative portion, is a negative
content change, or a downgrade in the overall rating, the PRF must be re-accomplished. In
addition to the steps above, the officer must be provided a copy of the re-accomplished
PRF and a letter, similar to the letter provided to an officer who receives a “Do Not Promote
278 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
This Board” recommendation, stating the officer’s right to write a letter to the central
selection board.
8.6. Promotion Recommendations for Colonels. This section describes how to recommend
colonels for promotion to the grade of brigadier general. It applies to officers eligible for
consideration by the HAF or AFR general officer central selection board or an ANG federal
recognition board.
8.6.1. Responsibilities in the Promotion Recommendation Process.
8.6.1.1. Heads of management levels must:
8.6.1.1.1. Prepare PRFs on all promotion-eligible colonels under consideration by the
appropriate selection or federal recognition board (e.g., extended active duty colonels
with two years’ time in grade as of the board convening date). Note: Do not prepare
PRFs on prisoners or officers on appellate leave, or on ANG colonels being considered
for certificates of eligibility to the grade of brigadier general. When preparing PRFs
on promotion-eligible colonels, management levels may consider, in addition to the
OCSRG, other reliable sources of information, to include the senior officer UIF (if
applicable). Table 8.1, notes 4 and 6, contain further guidance. Guidance in this
instruction take precedence over those printed on the AF Form 709. For ANG colonels,
the AF Form 709 must be signed by the adjutant general. For adjutants general, the AF
Form 709 must be signed by the Governor.
8.6.1.1.2. Personally complete PRFs by competitive category on all promotion-eligible
colonels who receive a “Definitely Promote This Board” and “Definitely Promote”
recommendation. Complete PRFs no earlier than 60 calendar days and no later than
30 calendar days before the selection or federal recognition board convenes.
8.6.1.1.3. Designate one or more representatives to perform this function for all other
promotion recommendations. Representatives must be senior in grade to the ratees.
Brigadier general selectees may not be designated as a representative for PRF purposes.
8.6.1.1.4. Send completed PRFs on all AFR colonels to AF/REG no later than 30
calendar days prior to the central selection board convening date.
8.6.1.1.5. Provide each ratee a copy of their PRF approximately 30 calendar days prior
to the appropriate board. Attach a memo (Figure 8.1) for ratees who received a “Do
Not Promote This Board” recommendation to advise the officer of the right to submit
a letter to the central selection board.
8.6.1.2. Vice Chief of Staff, USAF (AF/CV). The AF/CV, or designated representative,
serves as the single management level for Air Force colonels assigned outside the DoD, to
other military services, or as Air Force-level (e.g., senior service school) students.
8.6.1.3. Air Force Colonel Management Office (AF/A1LO).
8.6.1.3.1. Manages the PRF process for all RegAF list colonels.
8.6.1.3.2. Announces the PRF accounting date.
8.6.1.3.3. Matches promotion eligible officers to the appropriate management level on
the PRF accounting date.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 279
8.6.1.3.4. Announces the “Definitely Promote This Board” allocation rate and a
combined allocation rate for the “Definitely Promote This Board”/“Definitely
Promote” recommendations in the personnel services delivery memorandum (PSDM)
released before the board.
8.6.1.4. Air Force Reserve General Officer Management (AF/REG). Manages the PRF
process for all AFR colonels.
8.6.1.5. National Guard Bureau ANG General Officer Management Office (NGB-
GO/AF). Manages the PRF process for all ANG colonels.
8.6.2. Processing and Use of the PRF for colonels.
8.6.2.1. Send completed PRFs on all ADL colonels to AF/A1LO no later than 30 calendar
days prior to the central selection board convening date.
8.6.2.2. Send completed PRFs on all AFR colonels to AF/REG approximately 30 calendar
days prior to the central selection board convening date.
8.6.2.3. Send completed PRFs on all ANG colonels to NGB-GO/AF no later than 30
calendar days prior to the ANG federal recognition board convening date, or as directed by
NGB-GO.
8.6.2.4. Narrative-only/recommendation-only PRFs for permanent-party students,
patients and missing-in-action/prisoners of war.
8.6.2.4.1. The senior rater sends the narrative-only PRF to AF/A1LO no later than 30
calendar days prior to the officer departing PCA or PCS for school.
8.6.2.4.2. The senior rater sends evaluations for officers in patient or missing-in-
action/prisoner of war status to AF/A1LO no later than 60 calendar days after the
officer enters this new status.
8.6.2.4.3. Senior raters provide a copy of the narrative-only PRF to the ratee prior to
the officer’s departure from home station.
8.6.2.4.4. AF/A1LO maintains narrative-only PRFs until the officer leaves student,
patient, or missing-in-action/prisoner of war status. AF/A1LO destroys narrative-only
PRFs when the officer no longer competes for promotion in this status. AF/A1LO
maintains the narrative-only PRFs until distributed as specified below:
8.6.2.4.4.1. For officers who become eligible for promotion consideration by a
brigadier general central selection board before they change status, AF/A1LO
forwards the narrative-only PRFs to AFDW, Military Personnel Branch
(AFDW/A1K).
8.6.2.4.4.2. After completion of the AF/CV recommendation-only PRFs (which
are attached to the narrative-only PRFs), the AF/CV forwards the PRFs back to Air
Force Colonel Management Office for inclusion in the HAF selection folder and
provides copies to the ratees.
280 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
8.6.2.5. Restrict the use of the AF Form 709 to the brigadier general central selection
boards. Do not use PRFs for any other personnel action.
8.6.2.6. A PRF becomes a “matter of record” upon the convening date of the central
selection board for which it was prepared.
8.6.2.7. Destroy a colonel’s PRF within 30 calendar days of the officer’s promotion,
retirement, or separation.
8.6.2.8. Only the offices listed below may maintain copies of the PRF.
8.6.2.8.1. AF/A1LO for all ADL colonels.
8.6.2.8.2. AF/REG for all AFR colonels.
8.6.2.8.3. NGB-GO/AF for all ANG Colonels.
8.6.3. For instructions on completing the AF Form 709 for colonels, see Table 8.4.
8.7. Supplemental Management Level Reviews for Recommendation Upgrade Post-Central
Selection Board, (For ADL Only). The supplemental MLR is a competitive process required to
ensure fairness and equity in the post-central selection board PRF appeal process. As stated in
paragraph 8.1.4.3.10, management levels must maintain copies of the OCSRG that earned the
bottom “Definitely Promote” recommendation and the top two “Promote” recommendations in
carry-over at their MLR for each competitive category as it appeared before the MLR. The
OCSRG will serve as the “Definitely Promote” recommendation benchmark record to be competed
via a supplemental MLR against OCSRG of officers seeking a post-central selection board PRF
upgrade of the overall recommendation (Section IX) to a “Definitely Promote” recommendation.
8.7.1. Granting Supplemental Management Level Consideration. Management levels will
grant supplemental management level consideration only if they have the written support of
both the original senior rater and MLR president in accordance with Attachment 2,
paragraph A2.6.
8.7.2. Supplemental Management Level Review Procedures. Management levels will conduct
supplemental MLRs in conjunction with their next scheduled MLR, when appropriate
membership is present. When conducting a supplemental MLR, the applicant’s OCSRG, to
include the revised PRF as supported by both the original senior rater and MLR president, will
be competed head-to-head against the “Definitely Promote” recommendation and “Promote”
recommendation benchmarks and scored by all members of the MLR. Management levels
must ensure the applicant’s OCSRG contains only those documents that would have been
present during the original MLR. Scoring of the records will be a simple vote. The applicant’s
OSR must tie or beat the bottom “Definitely Promote” recommendation benchmark in order to
be awarded a “Definitely Promote” recommendation.
8.7.3. Disclosing of Supplemental Management Level Results. At the conclusion of the
supplemental MLR, the management level must ensure the MLR president certifies the results
via a results letter. If the applicant earned a “Definitely Promote” recommendation from the
supplemental MLR, the letter, along with the PRF, should be returned to the applicant to be
included in their appeal package (ERAB process in accordance with chapter 10). See
paragraph 8.4.4.1.2. In addition, a copy of the letter and PRF must be forwarded to
AFPC/DPMSPE. If the applicant is not granted a “Definitely Promote” recommendation from
the supplemental MLR, then the applicant’s appeal to change the overall recommendation of
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 281
the PRF to a “Definitely Promote” recommendation is without merit. As such, the results letter
and PRF should be returned to the applicant, and only a copy of the letter must be forwarded
to AFPC/DPMSPE.
Figure 8.1. Officer's Right to Submit a Memorandum to the Central Selection Board or
ResAF Central Selection Board (See DAFI 36-2501, Officer Promotions and Selective
Continuation, for further guidance).
282 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Table 8.1. Instructions for Completing AF Form 709, Promotion Recommendation (for
officers in the grade of lieutenant colonel and below).
L
I
N
E
A
B
C
To Complete
Instructions (See Notes 1 and 4)
Section
Item
1
I
Ratee
Identification
Data
See PRF notice for ratee identification data. If any data is
incorrect, notify the CSS/HR specialist and MPF to correct
the ADL. For RASL officers, notify the MPF (unit
assigned) or ARPC/DPTSE to correct any erroneous data.
2
Name
In all upper case, enter last name, first name, middle initial
and Jr., Sr., etc. If there is no middle initial, the use of
“NMI” is optional.
3
SSN
Enter Social Security Number.
4
Grade
Select grade (rank) from drop-down menu.
5
DAFSC
Enter the DAFSC, to include prefix and suffix, as of the
date the PRF notice is generated. See Note 2. See Note 3
for recommendation-only PRFs.
6
Organization,
Command,
Location
Enter organization, command, and location of assignment
(with attachment if applicable). For IMAs, PIRR or PIRR
Cat E, use attached organization. See Note 3 for
recommendation-only PRFs.
7
PAS Code
Enter the PAS code reflected on the PRF notice. If the PAS
code is incorrect, advise the CSS/HR specialist and MPF
(ADL officers), MPF (unit) or HQ RIO (IMAs). For IMAs,
PIRR or PIRR Cat E, use attached organization. See Note 3
for recommendation-only PRFs.
8
II
Unit Mission
Description
Provides a description of primary unit responsibilities (e.g.,
what it is and does, and to whom it is responsible), and is
the same for all members of a unit. Limit to four lines.
This is normally the organization listed on the PRF.
However, in large organizations, it may be necessary to use
mission description for a lower level, such as the division
level if it more accurately portrays the activity in which the
officer performs duty. For recommendation-only PRFs,
leave blank.
9
III
Job Description
Complete as if on an officer evaluation. Must use narrative
format.
10
Duty Title
Enter the approved duty title as reflected in MilPDS.
Pending or projected duty titles will not be used (Example:
Officer departs to new duty location, losing senior rater may
not use new duty title). See the Personnel Services Delivery
Transformation Training – Classifications: Duty History
located in myPers for further guidance. For students, enter
the student duty title (see Note 2). For AGR students’
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 283
recommendation-only PRFs, enter “Student, type of school”
(e.g., Student, Industrial College of the Armed Forces). For
AFR PV, see Note 8. For those assigned to a 365-day
extended deployment billet, enter deployed title.
11
Key Duties,
Tasks,
Responsibilities
This description must reflect the uniqueness of each ratee’s
job and not be standardized. Be clear and specific. Include
level of responsibility, number of people supervised and
dollar value of resources accountable for projects managed.
Avoid jargon, acronyms and topical references as they
obscure rather than clarify meaning. Mention additional
duties only if they directly relate to mission
accomplishment and previous jobs held during the reporting
period. For accessions receiving an evaluation while
awaiting the start of formal training, the first line of the
description will read “Officer is awaiting training.” This
may mirror the job description. See Notes 4 and 5. For
recommendation-only PRFs, leave blank.
12
IV
Promotion
Recommendation
Explain why the officer should or should not be promoted.
Limit comments to the next higher grade. See Notes 4 and
5. For narrative-only PRFs and RASL officers, comments
on all PRFs are mandatory. Comments are mandatory for
IPZ one time deferred (passed over) and APZ eligible
officers. Comments are optional for two or more times
deferred (passed over) APZ eligible officers. When
comments are optional, the final decision authority for
including comments remains with the senior rater.
Comments are required on all PRFs with a “Do Not
Promote This Board” recommendation, regardless of zone.
For ADL recommendation-only PRFs, this section is blank.
Comments are limited to the space provided.
13
V
Promotion Zone
For ADL I/APZ officers, in the drop-down menu, select
“I/APZ.” See PRF notice for promotion zone. Type or
hand-write entries. For narrative-only PRFs, leave blank.
14
VI
Group Size
For ADL officers, see Table 8.2. Type or hand-write the
entry. For narrative-only PRFs, leave blank. For ARC,
(I/APZ) rank order all officers awarded a “Definitely
Promote” recommendation, within each competitive
category, e.g., 2/5/10; the officer is ranked number 2 of 5
officers awarded a “Definitely Promote” recommendation
out of 10 officers in that competitive category meeting the
central selection board. Position Vacancy (PV): rank order
all officers nominated for PV within each competitive
category, e.g., 2/5; the officer is ranked number 2 of 5
officers. The senior rater has 5 officers in that competitive
category meeting the PV central selection board. The
Deputy RE ranks AGR student recommendation-only PRFs
284 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
according to the competitive category within the student
population. These PRFs are not included with the PRFs
under the SRID that applies to the Chief of Air Force
Reserve.
15
VII
Board
Enter the central selection board ID for which the senior
rater prepared the PRF (Example: P0423A indicates CY23
major board, and A0424A indicates the FY24 ANG major
board). The PRF notices includes the board ID. For
narrative-only PRFs, enter the date signed in this section.
For RASL narrative-only PRFs, leave blank.
16
VIII
SRID
Enter this code as shown on the PRF notice. For IMAs,
PIRR or PIRR Cat E, use attached organization. For
narrative-only PRFs, leave blank.
17
IX
Overall
Recommendation
The senior rater selects from the drop-down menu one of
three recommendations. See Note 6 for additional
information on narrative-only PRFs, non-line/LAF-J, and
aggregate PRFs. For RASL, do not mark a
recommendation for PV or narrative-only PRFs. Nominees
for ANG colonel are exempt.
18
X
Senior Rater
Data
See instructions at Note 7.
Notes:
1. Senior raters complete PRFs no earlier than 60 calendar days for the central selection board
(the PRF cutoff date). For AFR, complete the PRFs in time to arrive at ARPC no later than 45
calendar days before the board convening date. Senior raters award one of three overall
recommendations: Definitely Promote (DP), Promote (P), or Do Not Promote This Board
(DNP). Excluding AFR and AGR officers, there is a limit on DP recommendations to ensure
they convey the intended message. There is no limit on P and DNP recommendations.
2. If changes to DAFSC or duty title are approved after the MLR but before the central
selection board, see paragraph 8.5 for correction procedures. Once the PRF is a matter of
record, a formal application for correction must be submitted in accordance with Chapter 10.
(T-1) For RASL officers, contact ARPC/DPS if data is incorrect. For AGR students, enter
“Student of (type of school).” E.g., PDE, IDE, SDE.
3. For Recommendation-Only PRFs:
a. Enter in Item 4, student DAFSC; for Item 5, the organizational designation, MAJCOM, and
a location of the ratee’s assigned school; and for item 6, student PAS code.
b. For AGR students only: Enter in Item 4 the student DAFSC; for Item 5, Office of Air
Force Reserve (HAF), Washington District of Columbia; and for Item 6, student PAS code.
4. Some general guidelines:
a. For RegAF and ARC officers, promotion recommendation narratives are limited to the
space provided. In these comments, the senior rater should use plain language and limit use of
acronyms and/or abbreviations to provide a performance-based differentiation and/or
characterization of the eligible officer’s potential to serve in the next higher grade.
b. Endorsements for promotion are based upon an officer’s demonstrated character and
competence as detailed in the SecAF’s memorandum of instruction for promotion boards.
This is an opportunity for the senior rater to tell the central selection board why they should
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 285
(or should not) promote the officers. This should not be a summary of information already
contained in the record of performance. Comments or pushes for items that are decided
through other processes or means (e.g., developmental education, jobs, assignments) are not
authorized.
c. PRFs may include recommendations for promotion (limit comments to the next higher
grade).
d. Do not discuss classified information.
e. Consider including comments related to Article 15 actions, or letters of reprimand,
admonishment, or counseling. It is strongly recommended that control roster actions be
recorded. It is mandatory to record court-martial results unless actions resulted in acquittal.
f. Do not make recommendations for selective continuation since selective continuation boards
do not see PRFs. On central selection boards where promotion and selection continuation are
involved, PRFs are removed from the selection records before the start of the selective
continuation process.
g. Refer to paragraph 1.12 for inappropriate evaluator considerations and comments on
PRFs.
h. Duty information must be within the senior rater’s jurisdiction as of the PRF accounting
date.
i. Will not comment on an officer’s prior enlisted time. (T-1)
j. If an officer has a date of separation, has an approved retirement date, or is unsure about
career intent, it does not necessarily detract from performance-based potential and will not be
commented on in the PRF.
5. Comments are mandatory when an officer receives a DP or DNP recommendation, and
must substantiate, amplify, or explain the recommendation. (T-1)
6. For narrative-only PRFs, do not mark any of the three blocks and type “No Overall
Recommendation” in the top of this section. For non-line of the AF/LAF-J officers; MC and
DC promotion to major and lieutenant colonel; LAF, NC, MSC, BSC, and Chaplain Corps
(HC) promotion to captain, only P or DNP recommendations are used on the PRF (when the
promotion opportunity is 100 percent). Do not prepare a PRF for AF/LAF-J promotion to
captain. For officers submitted in aggregate or carry-over to an evaluation board, leave this
section blank.
7. Senior Rater:
a. Enter name, grade, branch of service (military officers and Department of the Air Force
civilians only), organization, command of assignment, and location. Grade must be that in
which the Senior rater is serving. (T-1). Exception: Enter “Brig Gen (S)” for brigadier
general selectees confirmed by the Senate. Retired grade is not authorized. If an officer has
been frocked, enter their actual grade unless the officer is serving in a funded billet and the
ratee is a lieutenant colonel or above.
b. Enter the last four digits of the Social Security Number if the evaluator is an Air Force
officer. The Social Security Number is optional, though encouraged, if the evaluator is a
civilian or member of another U.S. military service.
c. Do not include command level, unless it is an integral part of the duty title, with the official
duty title.
d. For ADL officers, enter current data as of the date of PRF completion. Do not complete the
PRF before the PRF cutoff date.
f. For ADL R-O PRFs, the President of the AF Management Level Review acts as the senior
286 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
rater. Enter the following information: name; grade; branch of service; for organization,
enter “HAF Student MLR”; for location, enter the location of the review; social security
number; and for duty title, enter “President, HAF Student MLR.”
8. For PV nomination, place the position number to the far right in the “Duty Title” block.
All PV nominations must have a valid funded position number with an authorized grade higher
than the officer’s current grade when they arrive at ARPC/PB. (T-1). PRFs with missing
position numbers may be returned. PRFs with invalid position numbers or those for nominees
not the incumbent (an UMD overage) in the position will be returned. (T-1). Direct questions
to ARPC/PB.”
Table 8.2. What to Enter in (Group Size) on the PRF (ADL Lt Col and below only).
R
U
L
E
A
B
C
If the allocation
rate is
and the number of IPZ
eligible in an entire
management level is
(See Notes 1 and 2)
then enter
1
10 percent
10 or more
“N/A.”
2
9 or less
the actual number of eligible within the
entire management level.
3
15 percent
7 or more
“N/A.”
4
6 or less
the actual number of eligible within the
entire management level.
5
20 percent
5 or more
“N/A.”
6
4 or less
the actual number of eligible within the
entire management level.
7
25 to 30 percent
4 or more
“N/A.”
8
3 or less
the actual number of eligible within the
entire management level.
9
35 to 90 percent
3 or more
“N/A.”
10
2 or less
the actual number of eligible within the
entire management level.
Notes:
1. For line of the Air Force (LAF) officers only, the following rules apply: APZ eligible do
not generate “Definitely Promote” allocations; therefore, they do not apply when
determining the entry for Section VI on the PRF. For management levels with only LAF
APZ eligible members, please reference paragraph 8.3.1.5.2. When an officer is added to a
central selection board to change promotion zone eligibility after Day 66, enter a “1 for IPZ
officers or a “0” for APZ officers.
2. For non-line/LAF-J officers (I/APZ), always enter “N/A” regardless of the number of
eligible unless they fall under the criteria of paragraph 8.4.2. (Board Adds/Promotion Zone
Changes).
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 287
Table 8.3. Senior Rater “Definitely Promote” Allocation Rate Table – Active Duty List
Officers.
Allocation Rates (Percentages)
Number
of IPZ
Eligible
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
4
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
5
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
6
0
0
0
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
5
5
5
7
0
0
1
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
3
4
4
4
5
5
5
6
6
8
0
0
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
4
4
4
5
5
6
6
6
7
7
9
0
0
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
4
5
5
6
6
7
7
8
8
10
0
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
6
6
7
7
8
8
9
9
11
0
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
6
6
7
7
8
8
9
9
1
12
0
1
1
2
3
3
4
4
5
6
6
7
7
8
9
9
1
1
1
13
0
1
1
2
3
3
4
5
5
6
7
7
8
9
9
1
1
1
1
14
0
1
2
2
3
4
4
5
6
7
7
8
9
9
1
1
1
1
1
15
0
1
2
3
3
4
5
6
6
7
8
9
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
16
0
1
2
3
4
4
5
6
7
8
8
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
17
0
1
2
3
4
5
5
6
7
8
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
18
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
19
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
21
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
23
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
24
1
2
3
4
6
7
8
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
25
1
2
3
5
6
7
8
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
26
1
2
3
5
6
7
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
27
1
2
4
5
6
8
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
28
1
2
4
5
7
8
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
29
1
2
4
5
7
8
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
30
1
3
4
6
7
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
31
1
3
4
6
7
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
32
1
3
4
6
8
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
33
1
3
4
6
8
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
34
1
3
5
6
8
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
Allocation Rates (Percentages)
288 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Number
of IPZ
Eligible
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
35
1
3
5
7
8
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
36
1
3
5
7
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
37
1
3
5
7
9
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
38
1
3
5
7
9
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
39
1
3
5
7
9
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
40
2
4
6
8
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
41
2
4
6
8
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
42
2
4
6
8
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
43
2
4
6
8
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
4
44
2
4
6
8
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
4
45
2
4
6
9
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
4
4
46
2
4
6
9
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
4
4
47
2
4
7
9
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
48
2
4
7
9
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
49
2
4
7
9
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
50
2
5
7
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
Note: To determine the number of senior rater “Definitely Promote” allocations
when there are more than 50 In-the-Promotion Zone eligible officers, multiply
the number of IPZ eligible officers times the allocation rate. If the result is not a
whole number, round down to the next lower whole number.
Example: A senior rater who has 63 eligible officers applied to a 65%
allocation rate earns 40 definitely promote allocations (63 X 65% = 40.95
allocations, rounded down to 40). This table applies to all competitive
categories. Exception: When the senior rater has three IPZ officers and the
allocation rate is 65%, senior raters may award two “Definitely Promote”
recommendations even though the computation does not result in two allocations
(1.95). This table reflects this exception.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 289
Table 8.4. Instructions for Completing AF Form 709, Promotion Recommendation Form
(for officers in the grade of colonel).
L
I
N
E
A
B
C
D
To Complete
Status
Instructions (See Notes 1 and 4)
Section
Item
RegAF
ARC
1
I
Ratee
Identification
Data
X
X
See PRF notice for ratee identification
data. If any data is incorrect, notify the
CSS/HR specialist and MPF for computer
correction of the active duty list (ADL
officers). For RASL officers, notify the
MPF (unit assigned) or ARPC/DPTSE to
correct any erroneous data.
2
Name
X
X
In all upper case, enter last name, first
name, middle initial and Jr., Sr., etc. If
there is no middle initial, the use of
“NMI” is optional.
3
SSN
X
X
Enter Social Security Number.
4
Grade
X
X
Select grade (rank) from drop-down menu.
5
DAFSC
X
X
Enter the DAFSC, to include prefix and
suffix, as of the date the PRF notice is
generated. For AFR refer to ARPCM.
See Note 2. See Note 3 for
recommendation-only PRFs.
6
Organization,
Command,
Location
X
X
Enter organization, command, and
location of assignment (with attachment if
applicable). For IMAs, PIRR or PIRR Cat
E, use attached organization. See Note 3
for recommendation-only PRFs.
7
PAS Code
X
X
Enter the PAS code reflected on the PRF
notice. If the PAS code is incorrect,
advise the CSS/HR specialist and MPF
(ADL officers), MPF (unit) or HQ RIO
(IMAs). For IMAs, PIRR or PIRR Cat E,
use attached organization. See Note 3 for
recommendation-only PRFs.
8
II
Unit Mission
Description
X
X
This block is not used for officers in the
grade of colonel. (AFR) Use approved
mission description based on PAS.
9
III
Job Description
X
X
Complete as if on an officer evaluation.
10
Duty Title
X
X
Enter the approved duty title as reflected
in MilPDS. Pending or projected duty
titles will not be used (Example: Officer
departs to new duty location, losing senior
rater may not use new duty title). See the
290 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Personnel Services Delivery
Transformation Training – Classifications:
Duty History located in myPers for further
guidance. For students, enter the student
duty title (see Note 2). For AGR students’
recommendation-only PRFs, enter
“Student, type of school” (e.g., Student,
Industrial College of the Armed Forces).
For AFR, use PRF notice/OSB. For AFR
PV, see Note 9. For those assigned to a
365-day extended deployment billet, enter
deployed title.
11
Key Duties,
Tasks,
Responsibilities
X
X
This description must reflect the
uniqueness of each ratee’s job and not be
standardized. Be clear and specific.
Include level of responsibility, number of
people supervised and dollar value of
resources accountable for projects
managed. Avoid jargon, acronyms and
topical references as they obscure rather
than clarify meaning. Mention additional
duties only if they directly relate to
mission accomplishment and previous jobs
held during the reporting period. For
accessions receiving an evaluation while
awaiting the start of formal training, the
first line of the description will read
“Officer is awaiting training.” This may
mirror the job description. See Notes 4
and 5. For recommendation-only PRFs,
leave blank.
12
IV
Promotion
Recommendation
X
Explain why the officer should or should
not be promoted. Limit comments to the
next higher grade. See Notes 4, 5 and 6.
X
Explain why the officer should or should
not be promoted. Limit comments to the
next higher grade. See Notes 4, 5 and 6.
For narrative-only PRFs RASL officers
and ANG officers meeting an FRB,
comments on all PRFs are mandatory.
13
V
Promotion Zone
X
X
This block is not used for officers in the
grade of colonel.
14
VI
Group Size
X
X
This block is not used for officers in the
grade of colonel (RegAF). If an officer is
awarded a DP, indicate the officer’s rank
order among the total number of DPs
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 291
awarded, then among the total promotion
eligible population (e.g., 2/5/10) (AFR).
15
VII
Board
X
X
Enter the central selection board ID for
which the senior rater prepared the PRF
(Example: P0423A indicates CY23 major
board, and A0424A indicates the FY24
ANG major board). The PRF notices
includes the board ID. For narrative-only
PRFs, enter the date signed in this section.
For RASL narrative-only PRFs, leave
blank. For ANG colonels nominated for
brigadier general, enter “N/A.”
16
VIII
SRID
X
X
This block is not used for officers in the
grade of colonel.
17
IX
Overall
Recommendation
X
X
The senior rater selects from the drop-
down menu one of four recommendations
(RegAF). See Note 7 for additional
information on narrative-only PRFs, non-
line/LAF-J, and aggregate PRFs. For
RASL, do not mark a recommendation for
PV or narrative-only PRFs. For AFR the
senior rater selects from the dropdown
menu one of three recommendations
(DP/P/DNP). For AFR, senior raters are
not constrained by how many DPs they
may award. For ANG colonels nominated
for brigadier general, enter “Definitely
Promote.”
18
X
Senior Rater
Data
X
X
See instructions at Note 8 for ADL
colonels, Note 10 for ANG colonels and
Note 11 for AFR colonels nominated for
brigadier general.
Notes:
1. Senior raters complete PRFs no earlier than 60 calendar days before the central selection
board (the PRF cutoff date). For AFR, complete the PRFs in time to arrive at ARPC no later
than 45 calendar days before the board convening date. Senior raters of ADL colonels award
one of four overall recommendations: Definitely Promote this board (DPTB), Definitely
Promote (DP), Promote (P), or Do Not Promote This Board (DNP). Senior Raters of ARC
colonels award one of three overall recommendations: Definitely Promote (DP), Promote (P),
or Do Not Promote This Board (DNP).
2. If changes to DAFSC or duty title are approved after the MLR but before the central
selection board, see paragraph 8.5 for correction procedures. Once the PRF is a matter of
record, a formal application for correction must be submitted in accordance with Chapter 10.
(T-1) For RASL officers, contact ARPC/DPS if data is incorrect. For AGR students, enter
“Student of (type of school).” E.g., PDE, IDE, SDE.
3. For Recommendation-Only PRFs:
292 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
a. Enter in Item 4, student DAFSC; for Item 5, the organizational designation, MAJCOM, and
location of the ratee’s assigned school; and for item 6, student PAS code.
b. For AGR students only: Enter in Item 4 the student DAFSC; for Item 5, Office of Air
Force Reserve (HAF), Washington District of Columbia; and for Item 6, student PAS code.
4. Some general guidelines:
a. Endorsements for promotion are based upon an officer’s demonstrated character and
competence as detailed in the Secretary of the Air Force’s memorandum of instruction for
promotion boards. This is an opportunity for the senior rater to tell the central selection board
why they should (or should not) promote the officers. This should not be a summary of
information already contained in the record of performance. Comments or pushes for items
that are decided through other processes or means (e.g., developmental education, jobs,
assignments) are not authorized.
b. PRFs may include recommendations for promotion (limit comments to the next higher
grade).
c. Do not discuss classified information.
d. Consider including comments related to Article 15 actions, or letters of reprimand,
admonishment, or counseling. It is strongly recommended that control roster actions be
recorded. It is mandatory to record court-martial results unless actions resulted in acquittal.
e. Refer to paragraph 1.12 for inappropriate evaluator considerations and comments on
PRFs.
f. Duty information must be within the senior rater’s jurisdiction as of the PRF accounting
date. (T-1)
g. Will not comment on an officer’s prior enlisted time. (T-1)
5. Comments are mandatory when an officer receives a DPTB (RegAF), DP (AFR), or DNP
recommendation. Comments are optional when an officer receives a DP recommendation
(RegAF). Comments must substantiate, amplify, or explain the recommendation. (T-1)
Comments for P recommendations are prohibited (RegAF). Comments for P
recommendations are optional (AFR).
6. On PRFs prepared on promotion-eligible colonels, Section VI does not exist (RegAF).
Management level stratification will be placed in Section IV, Comments (RegAF). (T-1)
Focus on the potential to serve at the GO level. Use ratee’s accomplishments as a colonel to
demonstrate potential and explain why an officer uniquely qualifies for promotion more so
than others. Use comparative terms and gauge difficulty of job challenge, but do not repeat
content of officer evaluations. Highlight factors that demonstrate desired GO traits (breadth,
depth, versatility, adaptability, generalist qualities, leadership, management intellect, presence,
image, communication skills, experience, functional expertise, appreciation for future vision).
Use personal terms and be clear and concise. Identify true contenders and place heavy
emphasis on future use as a GO. The head of the management level (or designated
representative) may solicit advice and information from the ratee’s supervisors and
commanders, both current and past. If rendering a DPTB or DP recommendation, indicate the
officer’s rank order among the total number of promotion-eligible officers in the management
level and competitive category (RegAF). Example: An officer receiving a DP
recommendation who is second in a management level of 150 total eligible would have the
entry “2/150.” If the officer does not receive a DP recommendation, leave this section blank
or enter “N/A.”
7. For narrative-only PRFs, do not select any of the four blocks and type “No Overall
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 293
Recommendation,” in the top of this section. For officers submitted in aggregate or carry-over
to an evaluation board, leave this section blank.
8. For ADL colonels, the head of the management level must complete this section if the
recommendation is a DPTB or DP. (T-1) For other recommendations, the head of the
management level may designate one or more representatives, senior in grade to the ratee, to
complete this section.
9. For PV nomination, place the position number to the far right in this block. All PV
nominations must have a valid funded position number with an authorized grade higher than
the officer’s current grade with it arrives at ARPC/PB. (T-1) PRFs with missing/invalid
position numbers or those for nominees not the incumbent (an UMD overage) in the position
for which nomination may be returned. Direct questions to ARPC/PB.
10. For ANG colonels, the PRF must be signed by the Adjutant General of their state
affiliation. (T-1)
11. For AFR colonels, the head of the management level must complete this section if the
recommendation is a DP. (T-1) For other recommendations, the head of the management level
may delegate to any general officer or equivalent within the chain of command (most
commonly the senior rater).
294 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Chapter 9
AF FORM 3538, RETENTION RECOMMENDATION FORM
9.1. When to Use the AF Form 3538, Retention Recommendation Form (RRF). Use the AF
Form 3538 to provide performance-based differentiation and retention recommendations to assist
involuntary separation or retirement central selection boards such as force shaping, reduction in
force, or selective early retirement boards.
9.2. Responsibilities.
9.2.1. First Evaluator:
9.2.1.1. Reviews the ratee's OCSRG, DQHB, and UIF before preparing the retention
recommendation form. May consider other reliable information about duty performance
and conduct except as prohibited by paragraph 1.12 or other regulatory guidance.
9.2.1.2. Must be knowledgeable of the ratee's most recent performance. The first evaluator
may request subordinate supervisors provide information on an officer's most recent duty
performance and may ask for suggestions based upon the officer's duty performance for
PRF recommendations.
9.2.1.3. Is responsible for evaluating each officer’s OCSRG and DQHB and awarding one
of three retention recommendations for eligible officers:
9.2.1.3.1. A “Definitely Retain” recommendation means the strength of the ratee’s
performance and performance based potential alone warrants retention.
9.2.1.3.2. A “Retain” recommendation means the strength of the ratee’s performance
warrants retention.
9.2.1.3.3. A “Do Not Retain” recommendation means the ratee does not warrant
retention and should not be retained by the board for which the officer is eligible. The
first evaluator must make comments explaining to the board why the officer should not
be retained.
9.2.1.3.4. Evaluators may not base their retention recommendations on a member’s
intention to separate or retire or a board’s retention or separation quota.
Recommendations must be based on the member’s record of performance and their
potential for further service.
9.2.1.3.5. Comments are mandatory. Refer to paragraph 1.12 for inappropriate
comments. In addition, promotion recommendations are not permitted in the RRF.
9.2.1.3.6. For Colonel Retention Recommendation Forms. Comments may be
handwritten. Comments should only relate to the officer’s record as a colonel.
9.2.2. Second Evaluator.
9.2.2.1. Endorses the RRF no earlier than 60 calendar days before the central selection
board (the RRF cutoff date).
9.2.2.2. Ensures no subordinate commander and/or supervisor asks or allows an officer to
draft or prepare their own RRF.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 295
9.2.2.3. Ensures there are no boards or panels of officers convened to collectively score,
rate, rank, or tally the records and/or generate a priority list of eligible officers unless
specifically authorized by this instruction. However, senior raters may request subordinate
supervisors to provide their assessment of the rank order of officers within their direct chain
of command.
9.2.2.4. Comments only if the second evaluator non-concurs with the first evaluator’s
recommendation. If the second evaluator non-concurs with the first evaluator’s
recommendation, then comments are mandatory explaining the decision. Note: AFPC
may provide alternate guidance when appropriate.
9.2.2.5. Provides the ratee a copy of the RRF (hand-delivered or sent in a sealed envelope
clearly marked, “To Be Opened By Addressee Only”) approximately 30-45 calendar days
prior to the board. The reason for this is two-fold: 1) to advise the ratee of the retention
recommendation and 2) to provide the ratee an opportunity to point out any errors of fact
so they may be corrected prior to the central selection board. Note: If the ratee is
geographically separated, send it to the ratee by “return receipt requested” mail.
9.2.2.6. Ensure the RRF remains a private matter with access being only between the
evaluators, the ratee and the board. Subordinate evaluators or others may have access to
comments or recommendation only on the RRF if permitted by the ratee.
9.2.2.7. Attach a memo telling the ratee who receives a RRF with a ‘Separate/Retire’
recommendation that they have the right to submit a letter to the board. See Figure 9.1.
9.2.3. The Ratee:
9.2.3.1. It is the ratee’s responsibility to contact the second evaluator if they have not
received a copy of the RRF no later than 15 calendar days prior to the board.
9.2.3.2. It is the ratee’s responsibility to ensure their record is current and accurate.
9.3. Retention Recommendation Form Submission. Administrative processing for the RRF, to
include SRID accounting, Air Force Promotion Management System management, unless stated
otherwise, will mirror that of the PRF except for those actions directly associated with the MLR
process. There is no MLR process for the RRF. Refer to paragraph 8.1.5 (RegAF and ARC) or
paragraph 11.1.6 (USSF) for processing procedures and responsibilities.
9.4. Air Force or Space Force Advisor Examination. For Air Force, when applicable, type,
“AF Advisor Review” on the left margin of the RRF and include the AF advisor’s name, grade,
“USAF,” date, and signature. For Space Force, when applicable, type, “SF Advisor Review” on
the left margin of the RRF and include the SF advisor’s name, grade, “USSF,” date, and signature.
See paragraph 1.6.8 for more guidance.
9.5. Correction of a Retention Recommendation Form. A RRF is considered a working copy
until the start of the board. If the RRF is not a matter of record, second evaluators have the
flexibility to change RRFs no later than two weeks prior to the central selection board. Use the
“Stop File” process (see paragraph 8.5) when correcting an RRF.
9.5.1. If the change to the RRF serves to weaken the narrative portion, is a negative content
change, or is a downgrade in the recommendation, the officer must be provided a copy of the
re-accomplished RRF and a letter, similar to the letter provided to an officer who receives a
296 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
“separate” recommendation, stating the officer’s right to write a letter to the central selection
board.
9.5.2. A Retention Recommendation Form becomes a “matter of record” upon the convening
date of the central selection board for which it was prepared.
Figure 9.1. Officer's Right to Submit a Memorandum to the Central Selection Board
(central selection board).
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 297
Table 9.1. Instructions for Completing AF Form 3538, Retention Recommendation Form.
Note: Air Force terminology applies to the Apace Force equivalent (e.g., Airman applies
to Guardian, Air Force Specialty Code applies to Space Force Specialty Code, etc.).
I
T
E
M
A
B
C
To Complete
Instructions. See Note 1.
Sec
Item
1
I
Ratee
Identification
Data
See the RRF notice for ratee identification data. If any data
is incorrect, notify the CSS/HR specialist and MPF for
computer correction.
Name
Enter Last Name, First Name Middle Initial and Jr., Sr.,
etc. If the officer has no middle initial, the use of “NMI” is
not mandatory. The name may be all upper case.
Social Security
Number
Enter Social Security Number.
Grade
Enter appropriate grade (rank).
Duty Air Force
Specialty
Code/Core ID
Enter the DAFSC to include prefix and suffix or three-digit
Core ID as of the date the RRF notice is generated, as
directed in specific board guidance. See Note 2.
Organization
Enter organization, command, and location of assignment
(with attachment if applicable).
PAS
Enter the PAS code as reflected on RRF notice. If the PAS
code is incorrect, advise the CSS/HR specialist and MPF.
II
Job Description
Complete same as on a performance evaluation.
Duty Title
Enter the approved duty title. Pending or projected duty
titles will not be used. For students, enter the student duty
title. See Note 2.
Key Duties
List key duties.
298 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
III
First Evaluator
Comments
Explain why the officer should or should not be retained.
This section covers the entire record of performance and
provides key performance factors from the officer's entire
career, not just recent performance. Comments must be
typed. Do not make prohibited comments. See paragraph
1.12. See Note 3.
IV
First Evaluator
Recommendatio
n
The first evaluator marks one of three recommendations, as
appropriate by electronically placing an “X” in the block.
V
Board ID/Senior
Rater ID
Enter the board for which the senior rater prepared the
RRF. The RRF notice includes the board ID. Enter the
five-character code used to identify the position of the
senior rater. Enter this code as shown on the RRF notice.
VI
Second
Evaluator
The second evaluator indicates concurrence or
nonconcurrence with the first evaluator’s recommendation
by placing an “X” in the appropriate box. See Note 3.
VII
Second
Evaluator
Comments
Comments are mandatory when the second evaluator marks
the nonconcur block. The second evaluator must provide
specific comments to explain the disagreement. Comments
must be typed. Comments are not allowed if the second
evaluator concurs.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 299
Notes:
1. Some general guidelines:
a. Comments must be in narrative format.
b. May include recommendations for professional military education and next
assignment, but not promotion.
c. Paragraph 1.12 applies.
d. Evaluators may consider and/or include information from other reliable sources (e.g.,
Reserve Officer Training Corps distinguished graduates, Officer Training Students
distinguished graduates, etc.).
e. Do not comment on rankings or recommendations from prior AF Forms 3538.
f. Comments may be warranted if an officer displays a reluctance to accept
responsibility, has a negative attitude towards the job, or performance has diminished.
However, if an officer has a date of separation, an approved retirement date, intends to
separate or retire, or is unsure about career intent, it should not be commented on in the
RRF.
g. Do not discuss classified information.
h. Do consider including comments related to Article 15 actions or letters of reprimand,
admonishment or counseling. It is strongly recommended that control roster actions be
recorded. It is mandatory to record court-martial results unless actions resulted in
acquittal.
2. If changes to DAFSC/DSFSC or duty title are approved after the RRF is a matter of
record, a formal application for correction must be submitted in accordance with
Chapter 10.
3. Senior Rater (lieutenant colonels and below):
a. Enter name, grade, branch of service (military officers and Department of the Air
Force social security number civilians only), organization, command of assignment, and
location. Grade must be that in which the senior rater is serving. Exception: Enter
“Brig Gen (S)” for brigadier general selectees. Retired grade is not authorized. If an
officer has been “frocked,” enter the actual grade unless the officer is serving in a funded
billet and the ratee is a lieutenant colonel or above.
b. Show social security number if the evaluator is a USAF or USSF officer (last four
only). The social security number is optional, though encouraged, if the evaluator is a
civilian or a member of another US military service.
c. Do not include command level, unless it is an integral part of the duty title, with the
official duty title.
d. Do not enter any classified information.
300 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Chapter 10
CORRECTING OFFICER AND ENLISTED EVALUATIONS
10.1. Purpose.
10.1.1. The ERAB was established to provide Airmen and Guardians with an avenue of relief
for correcting errors or injustices in evaluations at the lowest possible level.
10.1.2. If an evaluation cannot be corrected under Table 10.2, an applicant’s first avenue of
relief for correcting an evaluation is through the ERAB, which is accessible via the
vMPF/myEval.
10.1.3. An applicant’s second and last avenue of relief is via the AFBCMR by submitting a
DD Form 149, Application for Correction of Military Records under the Provisions of Title
10, U.S. Code, Section 1552, in accordance with DAFI 36-2603, Air Force Board For
Correction of Military Records. Note: Applicants should exhaust all other avenues of relief
(e.g., the ERAB) before submitting their request to the AFBCMR.
10.1.4. Retired or separated personnel are not eligible to apply for correction through the
ERAB; therefore, they must submit a DD Form 149 to the AFBCMR.
10.2. Program Elements.
10.2.1. Who Establishes the Board. The Commander, Headquarters Air Force Personnel
Center (AFPC/CC) directs the business process owner (BPO) of DAF Evaluation Programs to
establish an ERAB to assess requests to correct evaluations and to correct substantiated errors
or injustices for RegAF or USSF personnel. The Commander, Headquarters Air Reserve
Personnel Center (ARPC/CC) directs the establishment of the ERAB to assess requests to
correct evaluations and to correct substantiated errors or injustices on ARC personnel.
10.2.1.1. For Air Force officer appeals, the board president must be at minimum an Air
Force commissioned officer or civilian in the grade of O-5/GS-12 and above. For Space
Force officer appeals, the board president must be at minimum a Space Force
commissioned officer or civilian in the grade of O-5/GS-12/NH-III and above. For Air
Force enlisted appeals, the board president must be equal to or higher than the requester or
at a minimum an Air Force senior noncommissioned officer or civilian in the grade of E-
7/GS-9. For Space Force enlisted appeals, the board president must be equal to or higher
than the requester or at a minimum a Space Force senior noncommissioned officer or
civilian in the grade of E-7/GS-9/NH-II.
10.2.1.2. Each board consists of two board members and a board president. A board
member or president who was, or is, an evaluator for an applicant cannot consider that
person's appeal.
10.2.1.3. Evaluations that have become a matter of record are presumed to be accurate and
objective. Applicants filing an appeal must provide evidence that clearly demonstrate an
error or injustice was made.
10.2.2. Who Administers the Appeal Process. The Evaluations Programs Section
(AFPC/DPMSPE and ARPC/PB) manages the appeals process and executes board decisions.
Following the board’s decision, destroys all working papers, memoranda, worksheets,
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 301
recommendations, and notes between the board members or between the board and the
evaluation section which pertain to the case. The board does not create nor maintain formal
records of proceedings.
10.2.3. How the Board Will Operate.
10.2.3.1. Board members review applications and make recommendations to the ERAB
President.
10.2.3.2. The ERAB President.
10.2.3.2.1. Reviews the member's request, considers each board member’s
recommendations, and makes the final decision for the appeal.
10.2.3.2.2. Acts for the full board on applications which involve administrative and
technical corrections, or in cases that clearly lack the evidence necessary for
presentation to the full board, or in cases that require waiving the time limit for an
appeal.
10.2.3.3. The Board.
10.2.3.3.1. May be formal or informal.
10.2.3.3.2. Does not permit personal appearances. Neither applicants nor their
representatives can appear before the ERAB.
10.2.3.3.3. Handles all appeals confidentially and does not normally disclose
information to outside agencies.
10.2.3.3.4. Refers cases for action to appropriate agencies or individuals, such as Air
Force Office of Special Investigations, unit commander, and so on, if documents or
statements do not appear to be authentic. The Manual for Courts-Martial specifies
penalties for creating false or forged official statements and documents. Civilian Air
Force employees may be punished under federal law.
10.2.3.3.5. Reviews cases based on information supplied in the application. The
ERAB is not an investigative body and does not solicit additional documentation in
support of an application. However, if the board decides to consider information that
was not available to the applicant, the ERAB will notify the applicant and allow them
time to comment on the information. Exception: Information contained in MilPDS
or the Master Personnel Record Group.
10.2.3.3.6. Directs removal, inclusion, substitution and/or corrections to evaluations.
The ERAB is authorized to modify evaluations that differ from the applicant's request,
(e.g., the applicant requests the report be voided because the feedback date is incorrect;
the ERAB may deny voiding the report and instead direct the feedback date be
corrected).
10.2.4. Prohibited Requests. The board will not consider nor approve requests to:
10.2.4.1. Void an evaluation when the error or injustice can be corrected administratively.
10.2.4.2. Void an evaluation while keeping attachments to that evaluation.
302 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
10.2.4.3. Void an evaluator's section while keeping comments or ratings of subsequent
evaluators.
10.2.4.4. Void an evaluator's comments but keep the ratings (or vice versa).
10.2.4.5. Delete required information or add unauthorized information to an evaluation.
10.2.4.6. Change (except for deletions) an evaluator’s ratings or comments if the evaluator
does not support the change. When an evaluator supports changing ratings, all subsequent
evaluators must also agree to the changes (including the commander on enlisted
evaluations, the reviewer on officer evaluations, and the MLR board president on PRFs).
(T-1) Justification is required from the original evaluators. See Attachment 2, paragraph
A2.3.
10.2.4.7. Re-accomplish an evaluation without the applicant furnishing the new
evaluation.
10.2.4.8. Void, correct, or change an evaluation that does not meet the 3-year time limit
without a waiver. See paragraph 10.5.
10.2.4.9. Correct or rewrite an evaluation post-board based solely on the omission of an
optional statement, or to make the evaluation stronger (e.g., professional military
educational/developmental educational/assignment recommendations, awards,
deployment information, senior rater endorsements, and/or stratifications are not
mandatory, therefore omission of any does not make the report inaccurate or unjust).
10.2.4.10. Void or correct an evaluation because an action, (e.g., UIF, control roster,
Article 15, etc.), was removed:
10.2.4.10.1. Early or on the disposition date. Removal does not mean the action did
not take place. If the corrective action existed on or before the close-out date of the
evaluation, the evaluation is still valid.
10.2.4.10.2. Because the corrective action was “set aside.” If the corrective action
(e.g., Article 15) was “set-aside,” but the behavior that led to the corrective action is
still valid and the behavior existed on or before the close-out date of the report, the
evaluation may still be valid if the report only reflects the behavior and not the
corrective action that was “set aside.” If the action that was “set aside” is mentioned
in the evaluation, the ERAB would only remove the reference to it; not the behavior
that led to the action. Examples:
10.2.4.10.2.1. The ratee received an Article 15 for driving under the influence, and
later the Article 15 was set aside for reasons other than innocence. However, the
report only states “Used poor judgment—picked up for driving under the
influence.” Since the ratee was picked up for driving under the influence, and the
evaluation does not mention the Article 15, the evaluation is still a valid report.
10.2.4.10.2.2. The ratee received an Article 15 for driving under the influence, and
later the Article 15 was set aside for reasons other than innocence. The report states
“Used poor judgment—rcvd Art 15 for Driving Under the Influence.” In this case,
the ERAB would not void the evaluation but would correct the evaluation to reflect
“Used poor judgment— Driving Under the Influence.”
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 303
10.2.4.10.2.3. For the ERAB to decide favorably to void the evaluation, the
applicant must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the behavior did not
take place and the corrected action taken was officially set aside and not just
removed or expired.
10.2.5. Appeals based on Promotion/Career Opportunity. Although not prohibited, ERAB
requests based solely on a willingness by evaluators to change evaluations after non-selection
for promotion will not be favorably considered unless proven the evaluation was erroneous or
unjust based on content. See Attachment 2, paragraph A2.5.1.
10.3. Correcting Evaluations.
10.3.1. Prior to Becoming a Matter of Record. Once a digital signature is applied, the
comments and ratings are locked and cannot be changed. In addition, the digital signatures
cannot be deleted. If a correction needs to be made after the form has been digitally signed,
then the rater will need to re-accomplish the form. The rater will be able to copy the text areas
from the erroneous form and paste them into the new form. The corrections can be made, and
the form resigned. The form will reflect the date of the new signature.
10.3.2. Appealing Evaluations and Requesting Changes After Evaluations Have Become a
Matter of Record. See paragraph 1.4.3 to determine when an evaluation becomes a matter of
record. Applicants must exhaust all avenues of relief before submitting their requests to the
AFBCMR. The other avenues available are:
10.3.2.1. Administrative Correction. See Table 10.2 to determine if the requested
correction can be made through administrative procedures without referral to the ERAB or
AFBCMR. Due to the electronic process, only AFPC/DPMSPE can make corrections to
evaluations. Once an evaluation becomes a matter of record, even administrative
corrections will require an applicant to submit an ERAB via the electronic process
(vMPF/myEval). An example of a case that would not require an ERAB or AFBCMR is
when a report is not viewable in ARMS and PRDA or MilPDS is not updated.
10.3.2.2. When the correction cannot be corrected administratively, the next avenue of
relief is through the ERAB. Procedures for appealing evaluations through the ERAB are
prescribed in this chapter.
10.3.2.3. If the correction cannot be corrected administratively, the ERAB denies the
appeal, or the requested action is not authorized by this chapter, the next avenue of relief
would be through the AFBCMR procedures and can be found in DAFI 36-2603.
10.3.2.4. Performance feedback assessment worksheets and sessions are not subject to
appeal.
10.3.3. Any changes or corrections that substantially alter the content from the original version
require original signatures from all evaluators. If an evaluator (other than the rater) is
unavailable and all attempts to contact them have failed, the individual who replaced the
missing evaluator will sign the evaluation. When correcting an administrative error prior to
the evaluation becoming a matter of record and one or more of the evaluators are unavailable
to sign the re-accomplished evaluation, any evaluator in the rating chain after the unavailable
evaluator may sign.
304 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
10.3.4. Re-accomplish evaluations containing an excessive number of erasures, change
sentence meaning, or requiring corrections to the ratings. Do not use paper correction tape.
Do not correct ratings.
10.3.5. Evaluations will not be appealed under Chapter 10 or DAFI 36-2603 before becoming
a matter of record.
10.3.6. For PRF corrections, see paragraph 8.5 (RegAF and ARC), paragraph 11.4 (USSF),
and Attachment 2, paragraph A2.6.
10.3.7. Corrected Copies of Digitally Signed Documents. See paragraph 1.4.5.2.
10.4. Responsibilities.
10.4.1. The Military Personnel Flight (MPF). Provide training and advise personnel on the
ERAB process. Opens a case management system case when applicable.
10.4.2. The Commander’s Support Staff (CSS). Provides guidance on the ERAB process and
how to access the vMPF and/or myEval.
10.4.3. The Total Force Service Center (TFSC) Personnel.
10.4.3.1. Be knowledgeable of the appeals process, and familiar with the contents of this
instruction.
10.4.3.2. Determine if the correction is minor or requires a formal application by the
member. Minor corrections will be processed by the applicable office of primary
responsibility in accordance with Table 10.2. Note: Any and all corrections involving
DAF Forms 709 and AF Forms 3538 will immediately be forwarded to AFPC/DPMSPE
for correction.
10.4.3.3. Explains application procedures and documentation requirements via the vMPF
and/or myEval. The addresses for sending original documents are:
10.4.3.3.1. RegAF:
AFPC/DPMSPE
Attn: ERAB
550 C Street West, Suite 7
Joint Base San Antonio-Randolph TX 78150-4709
10.4.3.3.2. AFR/ANG (ARC):
ARPC/PB
Attn: ERAB
18420 E Silver Creek Ave, Bldg. 390 MS 68
Buckley AFB CO 80011-9502
10.4.3.4. Assist applicants in completing the on-line application through the
vMPF/myEval. If applicant is other than the ratee, the TFSC refers the applicant to the
MPF or CSS/HR specialist who will initiate a case management system case. If the
applicant does not have access to the vMPF/myEval, the TFSC will refer the applicant to
the MPF/HR specialist who will initiate a case management system case.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 305
10.4.3.5. Provide the military addresses of personnel and assists applicants in contacting
retirees through the worldwide locator in accordance with AFI 33-332, Air Force Privacy
and Civil Liberties Program. Note: The Privacy Act protects retirees' addresses.
10.4.3.6. Explain and emphasize expedited waiver procedures in accordance with
paragraph 10.5 and Attachment 2, paragraph A2.4. Advise members that it takes
approximately 90-120 calendar days to process a case, and if they are requesting a
correction to be completed before a board to please plan accordingly. Expedited cases
must reach AFPC/DPMSPE no later than 45 calendar days before the board convening
date, (not applicable for ARC). Note: Although every attempt is made to get cases
completed prior to a pending board, there is no guarantee that an application will be
completed prior to the board.
10.4.3.7. The TFSC will provide a cadre of specialists to act as liaisons for, and provide
guidance to, base level commanders and MPF personnel or CSS/HR specialists for any
questions related to the ERAB process or to check on the status of an application.
10.4.4. The Member.
10.4.4.1. Submits request for correction, insertion or removal of evaluations via the
vMPF/myEval.
10.4.4.1.1. If applicant does not have access to the vMPF/myEval, they may contact
the servicing MPF or CSS who will open a Case Management System/myEval case.
10.4.4.1.2. If an applicant does not have access to the vMPF, and the servicing MPF
or CSS/HR specialist, then the applicant must obtain AFPC/DPMSPE approval. If
approved, the applicant must submit an AF Form 948, Application for
Correction/Removal of Evaluation Report. See Table 10.6 for instructions. AF Form
948 will be authorized only on a case-by-case basis, and under extremely extenuating
circumstances (e.g., someone who is in confinement and has absolutely no way to
access to the vMPF). Non-availability waiver requests due to being out-of-the office,
on leave, or TDY will not be approved (not applicable for ARC).
10.4.4.2. Clearly and concisely state what the applicant wants (e.g., “Request my enlisted
evaluation rendered for the period 1 Jun 22 – 31 May 23 be removed,” or “Correct the duty
title in my enlisted evaluation that closed out on 31 May 23”).
10.4.4.3. Supply clear and credible evidence to support the application. See Attachment
2.
10.4.4.3.1. Supporting statements are required when making changes to an evaluation
and must have dates and signatures. These statements must relate specifically to the
period of the contested report. When information is not firsthand, the author must
identify the source. See Attachment 2.
10.4.4.3.2. All documents can be processed through the vMPF. All documents will be
scanned into the Personnel Processing Application of the vMPF with the application.
10.4.4.3.3. The applicant can obtain copies of the contested evaluations and or
documents required for their appeal through the ARMS and PRDA access in
vMPF/myEval.
306 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
10.4.4.4. Make sure that no rule in this instruction prohibits their request. See paragraph
10.2.4 and Attachment 2.
10.4.4.5. Applicants may contact the TFSC for guidance and application procedures.
10.4.4.6. Corrected Copies. See paragraph 1.4.5.2 and paragraph 1.4.5.3.
10.4.5. Corrections Initiated by Someone Other than the Ratee. When someone other than the
ratee finds an error in an evaluation, they:
10.4.5.1. Determine if the evaluation can be corrected administratively in accordance with
Table 10.2.
10.4.5.2. Take corrective action by contacting the MPF or CSS/HR specialist to initiate a
vMPF/myEval case or advise the ratee to take corrective action.
10.4.5.3. Provide a statement from the ratee, acknowledging they are aware of the pending
action and concur/non-concur with the request. Note: The ratee does not have to concur
to submit the request. This statement is for acknowledgement purposes only and gives the
ratee an opportunity to dispute the action.
10.4.5.3.1. If the ratee disagrees, they may explain why the correction should not be
approved and suggest an alternative within 10 calendar days from when the ratee was
notified of the pending action. Reasonable extensions may be requested. The omission
of any remarks will be considered as acceptance by the ratee.
10.4.5.3.2. If the ratee is unavailable to submit a statement, send a copy of the appeal
to the member with a memorandum explaining the error, and ask the member to provide
written comments within 10 calendar days from the date received. To ensure the
member has had an opportunity to review the appeal, have the member acknowledge
receipt on the statement or use certified mail to document the date of receipt.
10.4.5.3.3. Reasonable requests for an extension of the time limit should be approved.
10.4.5.3.4. When the member provides written comments, submit the applicant's
response and a copy of the memorandum with the application.
10.4.5.3.5. If the member fails to respond, annotate the remarks section of the
application with, "Comments from the ratee were requested but not received." Attach
a copy of the memorandum and either the member’s acknowledgment or the certified
mail receipt with the application.
10.4.6. AFPC/DPMSPE and ARPC/DPT.
10.4.6.1. Review all ERAB applications for DAFI compliance.
10.4.6.2. Process all applications that meet the requirements for submitting an ERAB.
10.4.6.3. Return all applications that do not meet the requirements for submitting an
ERAB.
10.4.6.4. When applicable, make corrections to evaluations, update MilPDS, and forward
the corrected evaluations to the appropriate offices.
10.4.6.5. Notify applicants of results via the vMPF/myEval or email.
10.4.6.6. Provide guidance to commanders, MPFs, and CSS/HR specialists as required.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 307
10.5. Meeting Time Limits and Expedited Requests.
10.5.1. Time Limits.
10.5.1.1. Submit appeals within three years following the date the evaluation became a
matter of record. If the exact date is not known, add two months to the date the final
evaluator signed the evaluation.
10.5.1.2. If the evaluation is more than three years old, submit a waiver of the time limit.
See Attachment 2, and paragraph A2.4.
10.5.1.3. Normal processing time for appeal applications is 90-120 calendar days from a
completed application. This does not include periods which applications are returned for
corrections or missing documents.
10.5.1.4. Promotion boards are closed out (cutoff) 30 to 45 calendar days prior to the board
convening date. In order to process an appeal in time, AFPC/DPMSPE or ARPC/PB must
receive the appeal no later than 45 days before the cutoff date, (90 calendar days before the
particular SSB or supplemental board). Although every attempt is made to expedite these
cases, there is no guarantee that the case will be worked in time to meet the particular board,
even when the case is marked “Expedited.”
10.5.2. Expedited Processing.
10.5.2.1. If an appeal must be resolved before a specific date or event, such as a pending
promotion or SSB, submit applications to AFPC/DPMSPE (RegAF and USSF) or
ARPC/PB (ARC) no later than 90 calendar days before the specific date or event.
10.5.2.2. The only cases that will be accepted for expedited processing after the 90-day
cutoff will be evaluations, including PRFs, that have closed out within 90 calendar days of
the board convening date.
10.6. Using Classified, Privacy Act, and Restricted Release Information:
10.6.1. Do not include classified information in the body of an appeal. When necessary,
include classified information in attachments. The applicant ensures classified attachments are
submitted in accordance with security directives establishing control and mailing rules.
10.6.2. When submitting documents on someone else (e.g., evaluations on other individuals,
AF Forms 2096, Classification/On-The-Job Training Action, PCS orders, travel vouchers, etc.,
on supervisors or coworkers), submit a statement from the concerned individual granting
permission to submit the particular document. Applications that do not comply will be returned
without action. The applicant may then resubmit the application with the permission statement
or remove the document from the application.
10.6.3. If the information in a restricted release file is essential to the case, request the
releasing agency to forward the information directly to AFPC/DPMSPE or ARPC. When
submitting requests to the releasing agency, members must waive, in writing, the right to
review the information. Include a copy of this waiver with the appeal application. When the
board has decided the appeal, AFPC/DPMSPE or ARPC/PB destroys the restricted file or
returns it to the releasing agency.
308 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
10.7. Requesting Special Selection Board (SSB) or Supplemental Promotion Consideration:
10.7.1. RegAF and USSF officers can, in conjunction with their appeal, request SSB
consideration for promotion, RegAF appointment, in-resident professional military education,
selective early retirement, or reduction-in-force separation boards.
10.7.2. AFR officers can, in conjunction with their appeal, request SSB consideration for
promotion.
10.7.3. RegAF and USSF enlisted personnel may request supplemental promotion
consideration in conjunction with the appeal application. Such a request must be indicated on
the appeal application; however, squadron commander’s concurrence is required when
submitting the request. The commander must complete the endorsement on the personnel
processing application by using the “HR Review” button in Case Management System; by
submitting a statement for application submitted by someone other than the ratee; or by signing
the AF Form 948 when the applicant does not have access to the vMPF or MPF or CSS/HR
specialist. See paragraph 10.4.4.1.2. The commander must indicate concurrence or non-
concurrence and provide an explanation for non-concurrence.
10.8. Resubmitting an Appeal:
10.8.1. Applicants can resubmit an appeal only if they have substantial new evidence which
the board did not initially consider.
10.8.1.1. Do not resubmit an application when the only documentation added to the case
is a statement which simply rebuts the ERAB’s previous decision. The ERAB does not
view a rebuttal statement as new evidence and will decline to reconsider the case.
Statements from members of the rating chain which respond directly to questions or
concerns posed in the previous decision memorandum are acceptable new evidence.
10.8.1.2. Include all previous documentation with the new application.
10.8.2. If dissatisfied with the decision of the ERAB submit an appeal to the AFBCMR. See
paragraph 10.1.3.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 309
Table 10.1. How to Submit Requests for Correction.
R
U L
E
A
B
C
D
If
the desired action is
then submit the request
then forward to
1
the ratee is
serving on RegAF
or USSF
allowed under this
instruction (See
paragraph 10.4.4)
To the ERAB via the vMPF
using the Personnel
Processing Application
(PPA).
See paragraph 10.4.4.1.2
when the PPA is
unavailable.
See Notes 1 and 2.
AFPC/DPMSPE, Attn:
ERAB
550 C Street West,
Suite 7 (Bldg 499),
Joint Base San
Antonio- Randolph
TX 78150-4709
2
the ratee is a
participating
USAF Reserve or
Air National
Guard enlisted or
officer
on AF Form 948 via
myEval. See paragraph
10.4.4.
See Note 1.
ARPC/PB, Attn:
ERAB 18420 E. Silver
Creek Ave Bldg 390
MS 68,
Buckley AFB CO
80011-9502
3
the ratee is a non-
participating
reservist, retired,
discharged,
separated,
dismissed, or
dropped from
rolls; or request is
not allowed
not allowed under this
instruction. (See
paragraph 10.1.4)
on DD Form 149 in
accordance with DAFI 36-
2603.
AFBCMR,
(SAF/MRBC),
3351 Celmers Lane),
Joint Base Andrews
NAF Washington, MD
20762-6435 or via
email to:
saf.mrbc.workflow@u
s.af.mil.
4
not the ratee and
have found an
error in an
evaluation
allowed under this
instruction (See
paragraph 10.4.5)
in accordance with
paragraph 10.4.5 and rules
1 or 2 above (as applicable).
the office shown in
rules 1 or 2 above (as
applicable).
Notes:
1. Table 10.2 lists errors that are correctable without a formal application.
2. Submit the original AF Form 948. See paragraph 10.4.4.1.2, with all supporting documents.
Submit original AF Form 948. See paragraph 10.4.4., or DD Form 149 (whichever is
applicable) with all supporting documents.
310 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Table 10.2. Correcting Minor Errors on Evaluations.
R
U
L
E
Minor Errors
Note: Once a digitally signed evaluation has been transmitted to AFPC or ARPC, only
AFPC or ARPC is authorized to make the correction. Submit an ERAB request via the
vMPF/myEval.
The error is considered minor if the request is to correct an error in:
1
The ratee’s identification data:
Name, grade, social security number, (component, ANG and AFR only), organizational
element, or the identification data of an evaluator who signed the evaluation.
Name, grade, social security, duty title, organizational element, date of signature, or final
evaluator's position.
Education or promotion or TIG/TIS eligible blocks.
See Notes 1, 2, and 3. Go to Table 10.3.
2
The ratee's DAFSC, DSFSC, duty title, or level of duty.
Enlisted: DAFSC or DSFSC must be reflected in the ratee’s duty history.
Officers: Not an administrative correction. Applicant must submit an ERAB request via
the vMPF/myEval. For active duty list officers, the DAFSC or DSFSC authorization must
be approved by the applicable AFPC assignment functional manager and reflected in the
ratee’s duty history.
Note: The MPF or CSS/HR specialist performs the duty history update once the duty title
is approved.
See Notes 1, 4, and 8. Go to Table 10.3.
3
The FROM or THRU date of the evaluation, the number of days of supervision, or the
reason for evaluation. See Notes 1, 5 and 6. Go to Table 10.3.
4
The marking of a “concur” or “non-concur” box, “meets/does not meet standards,” Forced
Endorsement, “is this a referral report,” or to add a missing rating.
See Notes 1 and 7. Go to Table 10.3.
5
Spelling, punctuation, or heading in an evaluator's comments.
See Notes 1, 9, and 10. Go to Table 10.3.
6
The ratee's name or grade in an evaluator's comments.
See Notes 1 and 9. Go to Table 10.3.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 311
Notes:
1. Do not make corrections using this table if any doubt exists about the appropriateness of the
request. Instead, submit a formal application in accordance with Table 10.1 with the
questionable circumstances fully outlined. Any person who knows of an error that is
correctable under Table 10.2 should bring it to the attention of the MPF evaluations section or
the records custodian responsible for maintaining the original evaluation.
2. Submit an application according to Table 10.1 if the request is to change or add signatures,
change or add signature dates on referral evaluations and supporting documents, and/or to
substitute a re-accomplished evaluation. Changes to the final evaluator's position (AF Form
911) will be made only when the MPF evaluations section or the records custodian having
custody of the original evaluation determines conclusively that an error exists. Do not correct
TIG eligibility as an administrative correction; it must be corrected through the ERAB.
3. If a supplemental promotion board, or the AFBCMR has changed an individual’s grade due
to retroactive promotion resulting from a review, submit a request according to Table 10.1. In
these cases, the evaluation will be annotated with a statement that reads “Member promoted to
(grade) with a retroactive effective date prior to the date this evaluation was rendered.”
4. The evaluation may be changed when approved documentation existed on or before the
close-out date of the evaluation and a central selection board has not considered the evaluation.
If approved documentation did not exist, was subsequently approved, or the contested
evaluation has been considered by a central selection board, submit a request according to
Table 10.1.
5. If a correction to either the period of the evaluation or the number of days of supervision
would invalidate the requirement for that or any other evaluation on file, submit a request
according to Table 10.1.
6. If changing the close-out date of an enlisted evaluation would result in the ratee receiving a
supplemental promotion consideration, the rater must submit a request according to Table
10.1.
7. Caution. Take extreme care when adding missing ratings or correcting “concur” or “non-
concur” boxes. Submit an application in accordance with Table 10.1 any time the rater’s or
endorser’s rating(s) are missing and the “non-concur” box is also marked, or neither box is
marked. However, an unmarked or mismarked “concur” or “non-concur” box may be
corrected when, after reviewing the evaluator’s comments and ratings, there is no question as
to which box should have been marked. If a rating is also missing or doubt exists, submit an
application according to Table 10.1.
8. Submit a formal application according to Table 10.1 to request changes to the unit mission
description or the job description.
9. Do not change references such as “airman” or “sergeant” to reflect the person’s actual
grade.
10. Do not change words (other than misspellings), phrases, sentence structure, or grammar
under this table.
312 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Table 10.3. Minor Corrections – Offices Authorized to Make Corrections and Disposition.
R
U
L
E
A
B
If the correction is
authorized in
accordance with
Note: Once the evaluation has been transmitted to AFPC,
only AFPC is authorized to correct digitally signed evaluations
and an ERAB case must be submitted via the vMPF/myEval.
1
All enlisted grades
(RegAF)
AB – CMSgt; (USSF)
Spc1-CMSgt
AFPC
See Notes 1 through 5.
2
2Lts through Lt Cols
3
CMSgts selectees
and CMSgts
Chiefs’ Group
AF/A1LE
USSF Senior Leader Management
(SF/S1L)
4
Colonel selects
and colonels (active duty
list)
Colonels’ Group
AF/A1LO
USSF Senior Leader Management (SF/S1L)
5
All general officers
and brigadier general
selectees (RegAF, AFR,
ANG, USSF)
General Officers’ Group
AF/A1LG
1040 AF Pentagon, Room 5C238
Washington District of Columbia 20330-1040
USSF Senior Leader Management Office
SF/S1L
2020 Air Force Pentagon, Room 4D284
Washington DC 20330-2020
See Notes 1 through 5
6
All ANG or AFR officers
and enlisted personnel in
the grade of colonel and
below
ARPC/PB
Attn: ERAB
18420 E. Silver Creek Ave, Bldg 390 MS 68
Buckley AFB, CO 80011-9502
See Notes 1 through 5
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 313
Notes:
1. Do not change words (other than misspellings), phrases, sentence structure, or grammar
under this table.
2. If the request is invalid, incomplete, or questionable, return it through any previous
processing levels to the correction initiator with appropriate instructions. The initiator must
identify all required changes because changing an evaluation’s close-out date can change the
number of days of supervision, the reason for evaluation, the signature dates, or the FROM
date of the subsequent evaluation.
3. If the correction is authorized, the office that maintains the original evaluation will make
the correction to the original and forward copies to the appropriate offices.
4. The ERAB and the AFBCMR have the authority to correct or direct correction and
distribution of all evaluations.
5. Disposition. Digitally signed via automated system. “Wet Signed” below.
a. TSgt and below (RegAF and USSF): Original – AFPC/DP1ORM (ARMS/PRDA)
b. MSgt selects and above: Original – AFPC/ DP1ORM (ARMS/PRDA)
c. ARC: Original – ARPC/PB, AFPC/DP1ORM (ARMS/PRDA)
314 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Table 10.4. Board Directed Corrections - Correcting and Disposition of Documents.
R
U
L
E
A
B
C
D
E
If the action is a
correction
that
then the agency
authorized to make
the correction is
who will
and
1
directed by the
ERAB
changes an
evaluation
AFPC/DPMSPE
ARPC/DPB
AF/A1LG
AF/A1LO
SF/S1L
correct and initiate
correction of the
evaluation.
See Notes 1
and 2.
prepares an DAF
Form 77
See Notes 3, 4 and
5.
annotates the
document. See
Note 6.
distributes
copies of the
corrected
evaluation,
DAF Form 77,
or other
documents to
records
custodians with
appropriate
instructions.
See Note 8.
2
directed by the
AFBCMR
AFPC/DPMSPE
ARPC/DPB
AF/A1LG
AF/A1LO
SF/S1L
correct and initiate
correction of the
evaluation as
directed by the
AFBCMR. See
Note 7.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 315
Notes:
1. On the bottom, reverse margin, type “CC” (for corrected copy), followed by the date,
authenticator's organization, office symbol, and signature, (Example: CC, 1 Jun 23,
AFPC/DPMSPE). Align authenticator data in margin to allow adequate space for punched
holes. The person signing the annotation must be a SSgt/GS-5 or above.
2. For evaluations being re-accomplished, annotate the signature blocks of evaluators not
reasonably available ORIGINAL SIGNED. If used, the comments and ratings of the
evaluators must be copied verbatim from the original evaluation. Note: All measures must
be exhausted before this measure can be used.
3. For voided evaluations (excluding imbedded TRs and PRFs), prepare an DAF Form 77
with the statement: (USAF) "Not rated for the above period. Evaluation was removed by
Order of the Chief of Staff, USAF,” or (USSF) “Not rated for the above period. Evaluation
was removed by Order of the Chief of Space Operations, USSF.” If voiding evaluations for
two or more consecutive reporting periods, prepare one DAF Form 77 that shows the close-
out dates of each evaluation.
4. For voided imbedded training reports, prepare an DAF Form 77 with the statement:
(USAF) "A TR for the above period was removed by Order of the Chief of Staff, USAF," or
(USSF) “A TR for the above period was removed by Order of the Chief of Space Operations,
USSF.” For missing imbedded training reports, no action will be taken since there is no gap
in the ratee’s record. The best course of action is to obtain a certified true copy (see
paragraph 1.4.5.2.) or a replacement TR and request it be included through the ERAB.
5. For a voided PRF, enter the statement: (USAF) "DAF Form 709, Promotion
Recommendation, for promotion board (specify the promotion board, for example, 0589A)
was removed by Order of the Chief of Staff, USAF," or (USSF) "DAF Form 709, Promotion
Recommendation, for promotion board (specify the promotion board, for example, 0589A)
was removed by Order of the Chief of Space Operations, USSF." Use a similar statement for
voided retention forms.
6. For documents that are attached to an evaluation, annotate documents with ACCEPTED
FOR FILE--ATTACH TO (closing date) EVALUATION followed by the authenticator's
data listed in Note 2.
7. Unless otherwise directed by the AFBCMR, annotate evaluations according to Note 2.
For voided evaluations, prepare an DAF Form 77 according to Note 4 except show the
evaluation was removed "By Order of the Secretary of The Air Force."
8. Disposition. Digitally signed via automated system. “Wet Signed” below.
a. TSgt and below: Original – AFPC/DPMSPE, processing to AFPC/DP1ORM (ARMS
and PRDA).
b. MSgt selects & above: Original – AFPC/DPMSPE, processing to AFPC/DP1ORM
ARMS and PRDA)
316 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Table 10.5. Correcting DAF Form 709, Promotion Recommendation Forms.
R
U
L
E
A
B
C
D
To correct an error
in:
See Note 1
and the error is verified
by, and supporting
documents come from:
then request the
correction by:
and forward the
request for
correction to:
1
Sections I, III (Item 1),
V, VI, VIII, or X;
or the spelling or
punctuation in the
comments.
See Notes 2 and 3.
the senior rater, MPF or
the management level
message, scan or
fax
AFPC/DPMSPE
or ARPC/DPB
2
Sections II or III (Item
2)
the senior rater
an application under
Table 10.1. See
Note 4.
3
Sections IV or IX
the senior rater and
(RegAF and ARC) the
president of the MLR
Board (Management
Review Level). See Note
5 and Attachment 2,
paragraph A2.6.
Notes:
1. When a PRF is sent to AFPC or ARPC, but it is not yet a matter of record (has not been
filed in the officer selection folder and/or scanned into ARMS and PRDA) contact the
Evaluations Operations Branch (AFPC/DPMSPE, ARPC/DPT) for instructions.
2. The duty title may be changed under this rule when the approved documentation existed on
or before the date the PRF was prepared. If approved documentation did not exist, or was
approved after the PRF preparation date, submit a formal application under Rule 2.
3. Do not change words (except misspellings), phrases, sentence structure, or grammar under
this rule.
4. If a promotion board has not considered the PRF, the application may be forwarded to
AFPC/DPMSPE. Please state that the evaluation it is a pre-board PRF that requires expedited
processing and list the board date.
5. If a promotion board has not considered the PRF, the management level can confirm
coordination with the MLR president, with their recommendation, by message, scan or fax.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 317
Table 10.6. Instructions For AF Form 948, Application for Correction/Removal of
Evaluation Reports (See paragraph 10.4.4 before completing).
I
T
E
M
TITLE
INSTRUCTIONS
1
Name
Self-explanatory.
2
Grade
Enter data pertaining to the ratee of the contested
evaluation.
3
Social Security Number
If an appeal was previously submitted under another name
(e.g., changed due to marriage, divorce, etc.), indicate the
previous name in Item 12, Remarks.
4
Return Address
Provide current mailing address of applicant.
5
Office Phone
Enter DSN and Commercial.
6
Current Military Status
Place an “X” in the appropriate box.
7
Email Address
Enter a working email address in case of questions and/or
to forward the decision memorandum.
8
Type of Evaluation(s) being
appealed and the thru date
List all evaluations being appealed by type of evaluation
(e.g., officer or enlisted evaluation, TR, LOE, or PRF).
Identify officer or enlisted evaluations, TRs, and LOEs by
their THRU (close-out) date.
Identify PRFs by the BOARD ID (Found in Section VII
on the DAF Form 709).
9
SSB/Supplemental Promotion
consideration for officers and
active duty enlisted personnel
Applies only to:
Enlisted: RegAF and USSF Only
Officers: RegAF, USSF, Reserve, and Air National
Guard.
For Reserve and Air National Guard enlisted personnel,
check the “N/A” block.
SSB consideration applies to central selection promotion
boards; RegAF or USSF boards; in-resident central
developmental education boards; selective early
retirement board, and report on individual personnel
boards.
Clearly identify the board for reconsideration. Example:
“Promotion to Major, CY23A” P0424A, “RegAF
augmentation, CY 25”, or “SMSgt, 23E8”.
See paragraph 10.5. for expedited processing
requirements
318 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
10
Commander’s Certification
Enlisted Only. The commander must recommend
approval or disapproval for SSB consideration by placing
an “X” in the appropriate box and signing and dating this
section.
11
Action Requested
Clearly identify the action desired for each evaluation
being appealed. Example: “Void 31 Dec 21 Officer
Performance Report;” “Change Duty Air Force Specialty
Code to reflect...,” “Add Senior Rater Deputy
endorsement.” If a new evaluation is to be substituted,
ask for substitution, not to void the original evaluation
(e.g., “Substitute attached evaluation containing senior
rater endorsement for evaluation currently on file”).
Make sure the requested action is not prohibited by
paragraph 10.2.4. For enlisted, indicate if supplemental
promotion consideration is requested. The commander
will complete Item 10 of the application.
12
Reasons to Support Requested
Action
Completely describe the error or injustice. For ease of
consideration, list each allegation that applies to the
application sequentially. Then, as needed, fully address
each allegation. If more space is needed, continue on a
separate page. For extremely lengthy statements, enter
“See Statement at Attachment” and attach full statement.
13
List of Attachments
List all attachments in chronological order and identify
each.
Example:
1. TDY Travel Voucher 12 Mar 23
2. Contested Enlisted Performance Report C/O 14
May 23
3. Substitute 14 May 23 Enlisted Performance Report
4. Statement MSgt Smith 13 Sep 23
If more room is needed, continue on a separate page. For
numerous attachments, use tabs to make the case easier to
review.
14
Signature/Date
Applicant will sign and date application. In cases where
application is submitted by someone other than the ratee,
refer to paragraph 10.4.5.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 319
Figure 10.1. Sample, AF Form 948, Application for Correction/Removal of Evaluation
Reports.
320 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Chapter 11
(USSF ONLY) SPACE FORCE PROMOTION RECOMMENDATION PROCESS FOR
OFFICER PROMOTION BOARDS
11.1. DAF Form 709.
11.1.1. Applicability. The DAF 709, commonly known as the “PRF,” will be used for officers
in the grade of lieutenant colonel and below only. PRFs are not authorized for officers in the
grade of colonel and above.
11.1.2. Purpose. The PRF is used for promotion purposes only and provides a promotion
recommendation for each eligible officer to the central selection board.
11.1.3. Types of PRFs:
11.1.3.1. Regular PRFs. An eligible officer’s senior rater completes the PRF no earlier
than 60 calendar days prior to the central selection board for which the officer is promotion
eligible (PRF cutoff date) and awards one of two recommendations:
11.1.3.1.1. A “Promote” recommendation means the ratee is qualified for promotion
and should compete on the basis of performance, performance-based potential, and
other considerations.
11.1.3.1.2. A “Do Not Promote This Board” recommendation means the strength of
the ratee’s performance and performance-based potential does not warrant promotion
by the central selection boards for which the officer is eligible.
11.1.4. Completing the PRF. See Table 11.1 for specific guidance on preparing PRFs.
11.1.4.1. Comments in Section IV, Promotion Recommendation, of the PRF are not
authorized when the overall recommendation on the DAF Form 709 is “Promote.”
11.1.4.2. Comments are required on all PRFs with a “Do Not Promote This Board”
recommendation. A senior rater must make comments explaining to the central selection
boards why the officer should not be promoted. (T-1) Comments must focus on the
substandard behavior of the officer and, if desired, the punishment received. (T-1)
11.1.5. Responsibilities.
11.1.5.1. The Senior Rater.
11.1.5.1.1. Reviews the ratee's OCSRG, decoration citations, DQHB, and UIF (if
applicable) before preparing the PRF. May consider other reliable information about
duty performance and conduct except as paragraph 1.12 or other regulatory guidance
prohibits. Examples of other reliable information may include but are not limited to
LOEs, bullets from a draft officer evaluation and/or decoration, etc. To reference the
“other reliable information” in their record, the officer meeting the board may submit
a letter to the central selection board.
11.1.5.1.1.1. Do not use any other SURF other than those indicated above when
preparing the PRF (e.g., AMS, SURF).
11.1.5.1.1.2. The intent of the "other reliable information" passage is to allow
senior raters to consider performance accomplishments since the close-out of the
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 321
last evaluation.
11.1.5.1.2. Must be knowledgeable of the ratee's most recent performance. The senior
rater may request subordinate supervisors to provide information on an officer's most
recent duty performance and performance-based potential and may ask for suggestions
based upon the officer's duty performance for PRF recommendations.
11.1.5.1.3. Will ensure no subordinate commander/supervisor asks or allows an officer
to draft or prepare their own PRF. Note: Eligible officers may provide input.
11.1.5.1.4. Will ensure there are no boards, meetings, or panels of officers convened
to collectively score, rate, rank, or tally the records and/or generate a priority list of
eligible officers unless specifically authorized by this instruction. Note: Senior raters
may request subordinate supervisors provide their assessment (without the use of any
boards, meetings, or panels) of the rank order of officers in their chain of command.
11.1.5.1.5. Is solely responsible for evaluating each officer’s OCSRG, career brief, and
DQHB in order to award PRF recommendations among eligible officers.
11.1.5.1.6. Completes promotion recommendations.
11.1.5.1.7. Provides the ratee a copy of the PRF approximately 30 calendar days before
the central selection board. If communication cannot be completed in person, send the
PRF via secure communications. The reason for this is twofold:
11.1.5.1.7.1. Advises the ratee of the senior rater’s promotion recommendation.
11.1.5.1.7.2. Provides the ratee an opportunity to point out any typographical,
administrative or errors of fact to the senior rater so they may be corrected prior to
the central selection board. Note: If the ratee is geographically separated, send it
to the ratee by “return receipt requested” mail. Contact the MPF for assistance if
necessary.
11.1.5.1.8. Must attach a memo (Figure 11.1) telling the ratee who receives a PRF
with a “Do Not Promote This Board” recommendation that they have the right to
submit a letter to the central selection board.
11.1.5.1.9. Will ensure the PRF remains a private matter with access being only
between the senior rater, the ratee, senior rater’s administrative support staff if the
senior rater desires (e.g., executive officer, secretary, MPF), the management level
administrative support staff, and the central selection board. Subordinate evaluators or
others may have access to a PRF’s comments or rating only if permitted by the ratee.
Note: No officer eligible for a particular board will be involved with the PRF process
for that particular board.
11.1.5.1.10. Provides a signed MEL of officers considered for promotion
recommendations to the management level.
11.1.5.1.11. Ensures the management level receives PRFs as required by paragraph
11.1.5.
11.1.5.1.12. Ensures their SRID in the Air Force Promotion Management System
reflects only their eligible officers no later than 105 days before the central selection
board.
322 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
11.1.5.1.13. Evaluates all additions to and deletions from the MEL through their MPFs
to their management level (e.g., officers who are gains as a result of a PCA/PCS
movement occurring prior to the PRF accounting date or officers initially assigned to
the wrong PAS code and SRID).
11.1.5.1.14. Officers Added or Deleted from Promotion Eligibility. This paragraph
applies to officers who become eligible or ineligible for promotion consideration in a
particular competitive category on or after the PRF accounting date. Causes for a
change in eligibility status may include: SSB or AFBCMR actions, administrative
errors, changes in date of separation, or similar circumstances. For officers whose
eligibility for promotion consideration is established after the PRF accounting date, the
senior rater of record at the time eligibility is established will complete the PRF.
11.1.5.2. The Military Personnel Flight (MPF).
11.1.5.2.1. Assists the management level in verifying accuracy of SRIDs and PAS
codes.
11.1.5.2.2. Provides PRF notices, a MEL, and a DQHB on each eligible officer to the
senior raters. Note: For officers not located with the senior rater, provide these
documents to eligible officers’ servicing MPF to be used in preparing PRF inputs for
the senior rater.
11.1.5.2.3. Provides other senior rater support and review as requested. The MPF will
send PRFs to the appropriate management level when requested by the senior raters.
11.1.5.2.4. Makes OCSRGs available to senior raters, to include records of officers
serviced by other MPFs.
11.1.5.2.5. Reviews PRFs to ensure administrative accuracy, when requested.
11.1.5.2.6. Ensures senior raters are provided a listing of newly assigned eligible
officers.
11.1.5.2.7. Evaluates any potential additions or deletions to the MEL for the senior
raters and management levels they service. See paragraph 11.1.4.1.13.
11.1.5.2.8. Monitors the Air Force Promotion Management System audit transactions
at least twice a week to identify any board adds, deletions, SRID changes,
PCS/PCA/date arrived on station actions.
11.1.5.2.9. Coordinates with management levels and senior raters as needed.
11.1.5.2.10. Checks the Air Force Promotion Management System news daily.
11.1.5.3. The Management Level.
11.1.5.3.1. Designates senior rater positions for all units within their jurisdiction and
assigns SRIDs to those positions.
11.1.5.3.2. Identifies officers occupying those senior rater positions by name, assigns
them SRIDs by name and PAS code, and ensures the Air Force Promotion Management
System is updated accordingly.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 323
11.1.5.3.3. Validates SRID alignment in MilPDS with PAS codes. Note: Ensure
MilPDS is updated accordingly; contact AFPC for any assistance.
11.1.5.3.4. Ensures PRF recommendations on eligible officers are updated in the Air
Force Promotion Management System no later than 35 calendar days before the central
selection board.
11.1.5.3.5. Sends all regular PRFs to AFPC/DPMSPE to arrive no later than 30
calendar days before the central selection board. Do not send senior rater or
management level MELs to AFPC/DPMSPE.
11.1.5.3.6. Maintains copies of all PRFs and MELs until announcement of central
selection board results.
11.1.5.3.7. Processes PRFs in accordance with paragraph 11.1.6.
11.1.5.3.8. Evaluates any potential additions or deletions to their senior raters and
coordinates with AFPC/DPMSPE as needed.
11.1.5.3.9. Monitors the Air Force Promotion Management System audit transactions
at least twice a week to identify any board additions, deletions, SRID changes,
PCS/PCA/date arrived station actions.
11.1.5.3.10. Coordinates with senior raters, MPFs, and AFPC/DPMSPE as needed.
11.1.5.3.11. Monitors the Air Force Promotion Management System news daily.
11.1.5.3.12. Ensures the SecAF memorandum of instructions, available on myPers, is
referenced and utilized for all senior rater promotion processes within their purview.
The memorandum of instruction provides instructions to all management levels and
senior raters to ensure decision makers throughout the officer promotion
recommendation process are focused on the same priorities and special emphasis areas
as the central selection board.
11.1.5.4. AFPC/DPMSPE.
11.1.5.4.1. Establishes and announces PRF eligibility criteria and administrative
requirements for processing PRFs.
11.1.5.4.2. Ensures completed PRFs are disposed of in accordance with paragraph
11.1.6.
11.1.5.4.3. Flows PRF notices and DQHBs approximately 120 calendar days prior to
the central selection board in Air Force Promotion Management System.
11.1.5.4.4. Processes all senior rater identification changes with multiple management
levels involved. Note: It remains the initiating management level’s responsibility to
obtain all concurrences for other affected management levels prior to submission to
AFPC.
11.1.5.5. The Ratee.
11.1.5.5.1. Contacts the senior rater to discuss any errors, omissions pertaining to the
PRF or if they have not received a copy of their PRF NLT 15 calendar days prior to
central selection board.
324 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
11.1.5.5.2. May correspond by letter with the central selection board and address any
matter of record concerning themselves that they believe important to their
consideration. Letters must be submitted in good faith and contain accurate
information to the best of the ratee’s knowledge and must be signed by the ratee.
11.1.6. Processing and Use of the PRF.
11.1.6.1. MPFs send PRF notices and MELs to senior raters upon receipt, approximately
120 days prior to the central selection board.
11.1.6.2. Senior raters sign completed PRFs on or after the PRF cutoff date.
11.1.6.3. Senior raters will ensure all PRFs are available for update into the Air Force
Promotion Management System by the management level no later than 40 calendar days
before the central selection board.
11.1.6.4. The management level sends completed PRFs to AFPC/DPMSPE to arrive no
later than 30 calendar days before the central selection board. When mailing hardcopy
PRFs, documents may be sent to AFPC/DPMSPE, 550 C Street West Suite 7, Joint Base
San Antonio-Randolph TX 711150-4705.
11.1.6.5. AFPC/PB ensures the removal of the PRFs from the OSR immediately following
the central selection board and forwards them to AFPC/DP1ORM to be placed on optical
disk. DP1ORM destroys the PRFs after imaging. PRFs filed on optical disk have limited
access. Do not use them for assignments, promotions or other personnel actions (except
SSBs, AFBCMR, or other personnel actions). Retain these PRFs for historical, legal, and
appeal purposes only.
11.2. Promotion Recommendation Process Milestones.
11.2.1. PRF Accounting Date (approximately 150 calendar days before the central selection
board). On the PRF accounting date, AFPC matches eligible officers to senior raters based on
the officers’ unit of assignment data in MilPDS. AFPC/DPMSPE announces the actual PRF
accounting date. Between the PRF accounting date and Day 60 before the central selection
board, management levels ensure the Air Force Promotion Management System is accurate.
11.2.2. PRF Cutoff Date. This date is 60 calendar days prior to the central selection board.
PRFs will not be signed prior to this date.
11.3. Special Provisions.
11.3.1. Officers Relocating During the PRF Process. For officers with a PCA or PCS
assignment to a new senior rater effective after the PRF accounting date, the losing senior rater
is responsible for preparing PRFs and ensuring quality review is completed.
11.3.1.1. The gaining senior rater may award a “Do Not Promote This Board”
recommendation when substantiated derogatory information has been received since
departure from previous assignment if time does not allow for not-qualified-for-promotion
action processing. This is considered a “Stop File” (see paragraph 11.5) and must be
submitted in writing through the management level to AFPC/DPMSPE. Gaining senior
raters must ensure the losing senior rater is informed of the “Do Not Promote This Board”
action.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 325
11.3.1.2. The management level will notify AFPC/DPMSPE when a gaining senior rater
awards a “Do Not Promote This Board” recommendation. This includes those awarded
within a management level as a result of a PCA action. This is considered a “Stop File”
under paragraph 11.5 (commonly known “Old Guy/New Guy”) circumstances and must
be in writing in accordance with paragraph 11.5.
11.3.1.3. The Military Personnel Flight (MPF) will:
11.3.1.3.1. Screen all officers gained after the PRF accounting date to determine
eligibility and notify senior raters accordingly. Ensure senior raters certify a review of
all gained eligibles by signing the “Old Guy/New Guy” Report on individual personnel
or projected eligible MEL which is generated from the Air Force Promotion
Management System.
11.3.1.3.2. Notify the management level of newly assigned officers whose senior rater
identification is not correct as soon as possible; monitor date arrived station for changes
(resulting from finance office updates) that would necessitate a correction to the SRID.
11.3.1.3.3. Provide the senior rater an OCSRG and DQHB on newly assigned
members.
11.3.1.4. AFPC/DPMSPE will update all “Do Not Promote This Board” recommendations
awarded by gaining senior raters and updates inter-command SRID changes upon “Stop
File” requests from management levels.
11.3.2. Officers Added to or Deleted from Promotion Eligibility. This paragraph applies to
officers who become eligible or ineligible for promotion consideration in a particular
competitive category on or after the PRF cutoff date. Causes for a change in eligibility status
may include: SSB or AFBCMR actions, administrative errors, changes in dates of separation,
or similar circumstances.
11.3.2.1. When an officer is added to a central selection board or changes promotion zone
eligibility, the senior rater completes the PRF in accordance with Table 11.1.
11.3.2.2. Senior raters void PRFs completed on officers subsequently deleted from
promotion eligibility following the PRF cutoff date.
11.3.3. Prisoners, Deserters, and Officers on Appellate Leave. Do not accomplish PRFs for
officers who become prisoners or deserters, or who are on appellate leave on or before the PRF
accounting date. Notify AFPC/DPMSPE through the management level to have these officers
removed from the senior rater MEL unless the status is after the PRF accounting date.
AFPC/DPMSPE prepares a board-specific DAF Form 77 for active duty list officers who fall
into this category and places it into their selection record. However, officers identified as
prisoners, deserters, or on appellate leave after the PRF accounting date will require PRFs from
the losing senior rater.
11.3.4. Officers assigned directly to the offices of the CSO, SecAF, CJCS, SECDEF,
VPOTUS, or POTUS, and officers assigned to Space Force Headquarters, Air Force
Headquarters, other DoD staffs, outside the DoD and to other military departments, Joint
positions, and CCMDs. For these officers, the Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC/DPMSPE)
acts as the management level. The responsibilities of the Air Force Personnel Center are the
same as those in paragraph 11.1.5.3 (Exception: United States Space Command acts as its
326 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
own management level). The CSO, SecAF, CJCS, SECDEF, VPOTUS, or POTUS are sole
senior raters and will complete PRFs for promotion eligible officers for whom they are the
direct reporting official.
11.3.5. Officers Assigned as Permanent Party Students.
11.3.5.1. Management Level Students. Officers assigned as permanent party students
training in their utilization field to include TDY in a training status. In-utilization training
includes any follow-on, specialized, requalification, upgrade, enhancement, or broadening
training in the officer’s utilization field. Responsibilities of the senior rater and
management level with regard to management level students are the same as those in
paragraph 11.1.5.
11.3.5.2. SF Level Students. Officers assigned as permanent party students training
outside their utilization field. Outside utilization training includes developmental
education, degree-granting programs (usually Air Force Institute of Technology
sponsored), language training, Education With Industry programs, attaché/designate
training, internships, and initial qualification training into a new utilization field. Space
Training and Readiness Command (STARCOM) acts as the management level and
STARCOM/CC, or as further delegated, acts as the senior rater for SF level students.
11.3.6. Officers Assigned to Air Force units. For officers assigned to HAF, the Air Force
Personnel Center (AFPC/DPMSPE) acts as the management level (see paragraph 11.3.4.).
For officers assigned to the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL), Space Systems Command
(SSC) acts as the management level. For officers assigned to all other Air Force units, Space
Operations Command (SpOC) acts as the management level.
11.4. Correction of Promotion Recommendation Forms (PRF) (Stop File process). A PRF is
considered a working copy until the start of the central selection board. If the PRF is not a matter
of record, senior raters have the flexibility to change PRFs. Note: All changes to PRFs should
be completed no later than 2 weeks prior to the central selection board. However, in extreme
circumstances and on a case-by-case basis, AFPC/DPMSPE may approve changes up to one duty
day prior to the central selection board. The request must be from an O-6/equivalent or above, who
has justification as to why the correction was not discovered within the time limit.
11.4.1. Changes to the PRF will be made by the senior rater. The senior rater notifies the
management level when a change is required and forwards the corrected PRF to the
management level.
11.4.2. The management level will notify AFPC/DPMSPE to place an immediate “Stop File”
on the affected officer’s PRF with written communication, identifying the change, (fax, email,
and letter) within 24 hours of initial notification.
11.4.3. The senior rater provides a copy of the corrected PRF to the officer.
11.4.4. The management level forwards the corrected PRF to AFPC/DPMSPE.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 327
Figure 11.1. Officer's Right to Submit a Memorandum to the Central Selection Board (See
DAFI 36-2501, Officer Promotions and Selective Continuation, for further guidance).
328 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Table 11.1. Instructions for Completing DAF Form 709, Promotion Recommendation Form
(for officers in the grade of lieutenant colonel and below).
L
I
N
E
A
B
C
To Complete
Instructions (see Note 1)
Section
Item
1
I
Ratee Identification
Data
See PRF notice for ratee identification data. If any data is
incorrect, notify the CSS/HR specialist and MPF for
computer correction for active duty list officers.
2
Name
In all upper case, enter last name, first name, middle initial
and Jr., Sr., etc. If there is no middle initial, the use of
“NMI” is optional.
3
SSN
Enter Social Security Number.
4
Grade
Select grade from the drop-down menu.
5
DAFSC/DSFSC
Enter the DSFSC, to include prefix and suffix, as of the date
the PRF notice is generated.
6
Organization,
Command,
Location
Enter organization, command, and location of assignment
(with attachment if applicable).
7
PAS Code
Enter PAS code reflected on the PRF notice. If the PAS
code is incorrect, advise the CSS/HR specialist and MPF.
8
II
Unit Mission
Description
Leave blank. Comments are not authorized in this section.
9
III
Job Description
10
Duty Title
Enter the approved duty title as reflected in MilPDS.
Format the same as if on an AF Form 707. Pending or
projected duty titles will not be used (Example: Officer
departs to new duty location, losing senior rater may not use
new duty title). See the Personnel Services Delivery
Transformation Training – Classifications: Duty History
located in myPers for further guidance. For students, enter
the student duty title.
11
Key Duties, Tasks,
Responsibilities
Leave blank. Comments are not authorized in this section.
12
IV
Promotion
Recommendation
Comments are not authorized on all PRFs with a “Promote”
recommendation, regardless of zone. Comments are
required on all PRFs with the “Do Not Promote This
Board” recommendation, regardless of zone.
13
V
Promotion Zone
For ADL I/APZ officers, in the box, select “I/APZ.” See the
PRF notice for promotion zone. Type or hand-write entries.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 329
14
VI
Group Size
Enter “N/A”
15
VII
Board
Enter the central selection board ID for which the senior
rater prepared the PRF (Example: F0422A indicates CY22
major board). The PRF notices includes the board ID.
16
VIII
SRID
Enter this code as shown on the PRF notice.
17
IX
Overall
Recommendation
The senior rater selects from the drop-down menu either
"Promote" or "Do Not Promote." "Definitely Promote" and
"No overall recommendation" are not authorized.
18
X
Senior Rater Date
See instructions at Note 4.
Notes:
1. Senior raters complete PRFs no earlier than 60 calendar days for the central selection board
(the PRF cutoff date). Senior raters award one of two overall recommendations: Promote (P) or
Do Not Promote This Board (DNP). There is no limit on P and DNP recommendations.
2. Once the PRF is a matter of record, a formal application for correction must be submitted in
accordance with Chapter 10.
3. Comments are mandatory when an officer receives a DNP recommendation, and must
substantiate, amplify, or explain the recommendation. Comments for P recommendations are
NOT authorized.
4. Senior Rater:
a. Enter name, grade, branch of service (military officers and DAF civilians only), organization,
command of assignment, and location. Grade must be that in which the senior rater is serving.
Exception: Enter “Brig Gen (S)” for brigadier general selectees confirmed by the Senate.
Retired grade is not authorized. If an officer has been frocked, enter their actual grade unless the
officer is serving in a funded billet and the ratee is a lieutenant colonel or above.
b. Enter the last four digits of the social security number if the evaluator is a Space Force officer.
The social security number is optional, though encouraged, if the evaluator is a civilian or member
of another U.S. military service.
c. Do not include command level, unless it is an integral part of the duty title, with the official
duty title.
d. Do not enter any classified information.
e. For ADL officers, enter current data as of the date of PRF completion. Do not complete the
PRF before the PRF cutoff date.
f. For Space Force Level Students – the senior rater is the STARCOM/CC, or as further
delegated.
ALEX WAGNER
Assistant Secretary of the Air Force
(Manpower and Reserve Affairs)
330 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Attachment 1
GLOSSARY OF REFERENCES AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION
References
10 U.S.C. § 10211, Policies and Regulations: Participation of Reserve Officers in Preparation
and Administration
10 U.S.C. § 10216, Military Technicians (Dual Status)
10 U.S.C. § 10305, Air Force Reserve Forces Policy Committee
10 U.S.C. § 12301, Reserve components generally
10 U.S.C. § 12301(a), (war or national emergency)
10 U.S.C. § 12304, Presidential Reserve Call-Up Authority
10 U.S.C. § 12302, Ready Reserve
10 U.S.C. § 12310, Reserves: For Organizing, Administering, etc., Reserve Components
10 U.S.C. § 12402, Army and Air National Guard of the United States: Commissioned Officers;
Duty in National Guard Bureau
10 U.S.C. § 619, Eligibility for Consideration for Promotion
10 U.S.C. § 641, Applicability of Chapter
10 U.S.C. § 9013, Secretary of the Air Force
32 U.S.C. § 708, Property and Fiscal Officers
32 U.S.C. § 709, Technicians: Employment, Use, Status
Public Law 113-66, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014, 26 December
2013
Public Law 113-291, Carl Levin and Howard P. "Buck" McKeon National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015, 19 December 2014
Joint Publication 1, Doctrine for the Armed Forces of the United States, 1 December 2020
Joint Publication 1-2, Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms, 8
November 2010
DoDM5210.42_AFMAN 13-501, Nuclear Weapons Personnel Reliability Program (PRP), 19
September 2018
SORN F036 AF PC C, Military Personnel Records Systems
SORN F036 AFPC J, Promotions Documents and Records Tracking Systems (PRODARTS)
SORN F036 AF PC Q, Personnel Data System (PDS)
SORN F036 AFPC S, Officer Promotion Propriety Actions
DAFPD 36-24, Military Evaluations, 7 October 2022
AFI 33-322, Records Management and Information Governance Program, 23 March 2020
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 331
AFI 33-332, Air Force Privacy and Civil Liberties Program, 10 March 2020
AFI36-2606, Reenlistments and Extensions of Enlistment in the United States Air Force, 20
September 2019
AFI 36-3026V1, Identification Cards For Members of the Uniformed Services, their Eligible
Family Members, and Other Eligible Personnel, 4 August 2017
AFI 36-3203, Service Retirements, 29 January 2021
DAFI 36-2110, Total Force Assignments, 2 August 2021
DAFI 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records, 4 October 2022
DAFI 36-2608, Military Personnel Records Systems, 16 April 2021
DAFI 36-2710, Equal Opportunity Program, 18 June 2020
DAFI 36-3211, Military Separations, 24 June 2022
DAFI 51-508, Political Activities, Free Speech and Freedom of Assembly of Air Force
Personnel, 24 March 2023
DAFI 51-509, Appointment to and Assumption of Command, 10 February 2023
DAFI 91-204, Safety Investigations and Reports, 10 March 2021
DAFMAN 90-161, Publishing Processes and Procedures, 15 April 2022
Enlisted Force Structure
Secretary of Defense’s Report to the President on Defense Management of July 1989
Prescribed Forms
DAF Form 77, Letter of Evaluation
DAF Form 78, Air Force General Officer Promotion Recommendation
AF Form 475, Education/Training Report
AF Form 707, Officer Performance Report (Lt thru Col)
DAF Form 709, Promotion Recommendation
AF Form 715, Officer Performance Brief (O-1 thru O-6)
AF Form 716, Enlisted Performance Brief (CMSgt)
AF Form 724, Airman Comprehensive Assessment Worksheet (2Lt thru Col)
DAF Form 910, Enlisted Performance Report (AB/Spc1 thru TSgt)
AF Form 911, Enlisted Performance Report (MSgt thru SMSgt)
AF Form 912, Enlisted Performance Report (CMSgt)
AF Form 931, Airman Comprehensive Assessment Worksheet (AB thru TSgt)
AF Form 932, Airman Comprehensive Assessment Worksheet (MSgt thru CMSgt)
AF Form 948, Application for Correction/Removal of Evaluation Reports
332 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
AF Form 3538, Retention Recommendation
AF Form 3538E, Enlisted Retention Recommendation
Adopted Forms
DD Form 149, Application for Correction of Military Records Under the Provisions of Title 10,
U.S. Code, Section 1552
AF Form 469, Duty Limiting Condition Report
AF Form 847, Recommendation for Change of Publication
AF Form 2098, Duty Status Change
DAF Form 1613, Statement of Service
AETC Form 156, Student Training Report
Abbreviations and Acronyms
ACA—Airman Comprehensive Assessment
ADCON—Administrative Control
ADL—Active Duty List
AFBCMR—Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records
AFI—Air Force Instruction
AFPC—Air Force Personnel Center
AFR—Air Force Reserve
AFRC—Air Force Reserve Command
AFSC—Air Force Specialty Code
AGR—Active Guard Reserve
ANG—Air National Guard
APZ—Above-the-Promotion Zone
ARC—Air Reserve Component
ARMS—Automated Records Management System
ARPC—Air Reserve Personnel Center
CGO—Company Grade Officer
CCMD—Combatant Command
CRO—Change of Reporting Official
CSAF—Chief of Staff, United States Air Force
CSO—Chief of Space Operations
CSS/HR—Commander Support Staff/Human Resource Specialist
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 333
DAFI—Department of the Air Force Instruction
DAFSC—Duty Air Force Specialty Code
DBC—Directed by Commander
DBH—Directed by HAF
DG—Distinguished Graduate
DNP—Do Not Promote This Board
DoD—Department of Defense
DOR—Date of Rank
DP—Definitely Promote
DQHB—Duty Qualification History Brief
DSFSC—Duty Space Force Specialty Code
EAD—Extended Active Duty
eBOSS—Electronic Board Operations Support System
EFDP—Enlisted Forced Distribution Panel
EPR—Enlisted Performance Report
ERAB—Evaluation Reports Appeal Board
FD—Forced Distributor
FDID—Forced Distributor Identification
FGO—Field Grade Officer
FLDCOM—Field Command
GO—General Officer
HAF—Headquarters Air Force
HC—Chaplain Corps
HQ—Headquarters
HSF—Headquarters Space Force
IDE—Intermediate Developmental Education
ILE—Intermediate Level Education (USSF Only)
IMA—Individual Mobilization Augmentee
IMT—Information Management Tool
IPZ—In-the-Promotion Zone
LAF—Line of the Air Force
LAF-J—Line of the Air Force Judge Advocate
334 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
LEAD—Leaders Encouraging Airman Development
LOE—Letter of Evaluation
LSF—Line of the Space Force
MAJCOM—Major Command
MC—Medical Corps
MEL—Master Eligibility List
MilPDS—Military Personnel Data System
MLR—Management Level Review
MPA—Major Performance Area or Military Personnel Appropriation
MPerRGp—Master Personnel Records Group
MPF—Military Personnel Flight
MSC—Medical Service Corps
MTF—Military Treatment Facility
myEval—My Evaluation
NC—Nurse Corps
NCO—Noncommissioned Officer
NCOIC—Noncommissioned Officer-in-Charge
NGB—National Guard Bureau
NMI—No Middle Initial
NSA—National Security Agency
NSR—Senior Noncommissioned Selection Record
OCSRG—Officer Command Selection Record Group
OPME—Officer Professional Military Education (OPME)
OPR—Officer Performance Report
OSR—Officer Selection Record
P—Promote—PAS—Personnel Accounting Symbol
PCA—Permanent Change of Assignment
PCS—Permanent Change of Station
PDE—Primary Developmental Education
PDS—Personnel Data System
PERSCO—Personnel Support for Contingency Operations
PIRR—Participating Individual Ready Reserve
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 335
PLE—Primary Level Education
POW—Prisoner of War
PPA—Personnel Processing Application
PRDA—Personnel Records Display Application
PRF—Promotion Recommendation Form
RASL—Reserve Active Status List
RegAF—Regular Air Force
ResAF—Reserve of the Air Force
RRF—Retention Recommendation Form
SAF—Secretary of the Air Force
SAPR—Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (Added)
SCOD—Static Close-Out Date
SDE—Senior Developmental Education
SecAF—Secretary of the Air Force
SECDEF—Secretary of Defense
SES—Senior Executive Service
SFSC—Space Force Specialty Code
SLE—Senior Level Education (USSF Only)
SML—Senior Materiel Leader
SNCO—Senior Noncommissioned Officer
SOS—Squadron Officer School
SR—Senior Rater
SRID—Senior Rater Identification
SSB—Special Selection Board
SSN—Social Security Number
STARCOM—Space Training and Readiness Command
STEP—Stripes for Exceptional Performers
SURF—Single Uniform Request Format
TAG—The Adjutant General
TDY—Temporary Duty
TFSC—Total Force Service Center (formerly the Air Force Contact Center)
TR—Training Report
336 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
UCMJ—Uniform Code of Military Justice
USAF—United States Air Force
USSF—United States Space Force
U.S.C.—United States Code
VLPAD (Added)—Voluntary Limited Period of Active Duty
vMPF—Virtual Military Personnel Flight
Office Symbols
2 AF/A1—2nd Air Force, Manpower, Personnel, and Services Directorate
AF/A1—Deputy Chief of Staff for Manpower, Personnel and Services
AF/A1LE—Air Force CMSgt Management Office
AF/A1LG—Air Force General Officer Management Office
AF/A1LO—Air Force Colonel Management Office
AF/A1PP—Military Force Policy Division
AF/A1PPP—Promotions, Evaluations and Recognition Policy Branch
AF/RE—Chief of Air Force Reserve
AF/REG—Air Force Reserve Senior Leader Management Office
AFPC/CC—Commander, Headquarters Air Force Personnel Center
AFPC/DP1ORM—Headquarters Air Force Personnel Center Military Records Section
AFPC/DP3SP—Headquarters Air Force Personnel Center Promotions, Evaluations and
Recognitions Branch
AFPC/PB—Selection Board Secretariat
ARPC/CC—Commander, Headquarters Air Reserve Personnel Center
AFPC/DPMSPE—Headquarters Air Force Personnel Center Evaluations and Recognition
Operations Section
ARPC/PB—Headquarters Air Reserve Personnel Center Promotion Board Secretariat
SF/S1—Deputy Chief of Space Operations for Human Capital
SF/S1L—HQ Space Force, Senior Leader Management
SF/S1P—HQ Space Force, Directorate of Military Policy and Programs
SF/S1PP—HQ Space Force, Force Management
SF/VCSO—Vice Chief of Space Operations
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 337
Terms
Above the Management Level (AML)(RegAF and ARC only)—There are seven units that are
above the level this DAFI defines as management levels: President of the United States, Vice
President of the United States, SecDef, CJSC, SecAF, CSAF and CSO. For purposes of the DAFI,
these units are also known as management levels.
Acquisition Examiner—A person, either within the rating chain or appointed by the management
level (minimum colonel/captain (USN) or civilian equivalent for officers; major or Navy lieutenant
commander or an equivalent civilian for enlisted) serving in an acquisition position and in the same
acquisition career field as the ratee who provides examination of evaluations for individuals
serving in certain acquisition positions (paragraph 1.6.8.). The Acquisition Examiner examines
evaluations to ensure the evaluation reflects acquisition-related considerations.
Active Duty List (ADL)—Officers on active duty except (per 10 U.S.C. § 641): Reserve or Guard
officers on active duty for training, for administration of reserve components, to pursue special
work, for the administration of the Selective Service System, LEAD and AGR officers; warrant
officers; retired officers on active duty; students at the Uniformed Services University of the
Health Sciences. For the purposes of this instruction, The Director of Admissions, Dean and
permanent professors at the Air Force Academy are considered to be on the active duty list. The
list is arranged by competitive category in the order of the seniority of the grade in which they are
serving.
Active Guard Reserve (AGR)—An ANG or AFR member serving on active duty in support of
the Guard or Reserve mission, under 10 U.S.C. §§ 10211, 10305, 12310, 12402 or 32 U.S.C. §
708 (Property and Fiscal Officers).
Additional Rater—The second evaluator in the rating chain, after the rater, to endorse a
performance evaluation. See paragraph 1.6.4 for restrictions, requirements, and exceptions.
Advisor—An Air Force or Space Force designated representative who provides a special review
of evaluations in activities outside the Department of the Air Force (paragraph 1.6.8.). The Air
Force or Space Force Advisor advises non- Department of the Air Force evaluators of Air Force
or Space Force rating policies and procedures and reviews officer and enlisted evaluations and
PRFs for compliance with the provisions of this instruction.
Aggregation—The process used when the number of eligible officers does not meet the minimum
number required for the senior rater to award promotion recommendations.
Airmen Leadership Qualities—Ten qualities grouped into four major performance areas (MPAs)
that are valued in our Airmen; used to develop and evaluate Airmen; and which are indicative of
potential for greater responsibility. In the MPA, Executing the Mission, the ALQs are: Job
Proficiency; Initiative; and Adaptability. In the MPA, Leading People, the ALQs are: Inclusion
& Teamwork; Emotional Intelligence; and Communication. In the MPA, Managing Resources,
the ALQs are: Stewardship; and Accountability. In the MPA, Improving the Unit, the ALQs are:
Decision Making; and Innovation. ALQs are evaluated via a proficiency-level scale.
Air National Guard (ANG) Non-AGR—Refers to members of the Air National Guard who are
not on Extended Active Duty nor assigned in permanent Active Guard Reserve (AGR) or Statutory
Tour status.
338 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
ARC—Refers to members assigned to the Air Force Reserve (AFR) or Air National Guard (ANG).
Typically used to address the combination of all members assigned within both AFR and ANG.
Annual Cycle Close-out Date (applies to general officers)—Annual major general and major
general selectee evaluations close-out 30 June; annual brigadier general and brigadier general
selectee evaluations close-out 31 July.
ARC AGR—Refers to members assigned to the Air Force Reserve (AFR) or Air National Guard
(ANG) component who are serving in a full-time AGR status or on a Statutory Tour (ANG only).
Carry-over—For line officers, the difference between the "Definitely Promote" allocations
(rounded up) based on the population of a Management Level, and the sum of "Definitely Promote"
allocations authorized senior raters (rounded down) based on each senior rater's population
(including those senior raters whose population is aggregated).
Civilian Director—Civilians designated to lead units/organizations (PAS codes[s]), excluding
Flight Commanders. Also see Other Authorized Reviewers.
Commander—The commander (or officer so designated) for administrative purposes (that is,
control roster action, Article 15 jurisdiction, and so on) of the ratee's assigned organization. Also
see Other Authorized Reviewers.
Company Grade—Officers in the grades of second lieutenant through captain.
Combat Zone—That area required by combat forces for the conduct of operations. The territory
forward of the Army rear area boundary.
Command Climate—The perception of a unit’s environment by its members. Commanders are
ultimately responsible for the good order and discipline in their unit and have unique responsibility
and authority to ensure good order and discipline.
Commander’s Review—See Other Authorized Reviewer.
Communications Zone—Rear part of theater of operations (behind but contiguous to the combat
zone) which contains the lines of communications, establishments for supply and evacuation, and
other agencies required for the immediate support and maintenance of the field forces. See also
combat zone; rear area.
Definitely Promote (lieutenant colonels and below)—Recommendation on AF Form 709 that
says the strength of the ratee's performance and performance-based potential alone
warrants promotion; (colonels only)—Recommendation on AF Form 709 which indicates an
officer demonstrates the potential for immediate promotion.
Delegated Signature—When a member signs on behalf of a signatory using the signatory’s digital
signature.
Department of the Air Force (DAF)—Includes the Regular Air Force, the Air Reserve
Component (Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard), and the United States Space Force.
Do Not Promote This Board (colonels and below)—Recommendation on AF Form 709 that says
the ratee does not warrant promotion on the Central Selection Board for which the PRF is being
prepared.
Duty Qualification History Brief—A computer product used by senior raters in the Promotion
Recommendation Process which includes such whole person factors as Developmental Education,
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 339
advanced academic information, board certification, joint duty and acquisition corps data and
award and decoration information.
Embedded Evaluations—an evaluation that is attached to the annual evaluation at the SCOD.
Evaluations—A general reference to the Airman Comprehensive Assessment (AF Forms 724,
931, and 932), OPR (AF Form 707), PRF (AF Form 709), Education/Training Report (AF Form
475), Letter of Evaluation (DAF Form 77), and the General Officer Promotion Recommendation
(AF Form 78), and EPR (Forms 910, 911 and 912).
Evaluator—Any individual who signs a performance report in a rating capacity.
Field Grade Officer—Officers in the grade of major through colonel.
Final Evaluator/Higher Level Reviewer—The evaluator in the rating chain who closes out an
OPR or EPR (Officer) -- The senior rater will be the final evaluator/higher level reviewer
(Exception: See paragraph 1.6.5). (Enlisted)—For MSgt selects, MSgts, SMSgt selects and
SMSgts, the last evaluator to endorse the AF Form 911 will be the final evaluator (Section IX).
The Senior Noncommissioned Officer Academy (SNCOA) Commandant is designated as the Final
Evaluator when the AF Form 911 is not endorsed/stratified by the Senior Rater or the SNCO is
non-promotion eligible. The SNCOA Commandant is also authorized to sign Section IX of DAF
Form 910 for non-promotion eligible Airmen or Guardians or if an enlisted force distribution is
not warranted. Furthermore, if a ratee is not promotion eligible, or if a Senior Rater endorsement
and/or stratification is not warranted, the SNCOA Commandant may act as the final evaluator on
MSgt and SMSgt EPRs within their direct rating chain and/or scope of responsibility. For CMSgts
and CMSgt selects, the senior rater will be the final evaluator (AF Form 912). When the rater is
an O-6 or above, or a civilian (GS-15 or above) and qualifies as a single evaluator (see definition
of single evaluator) and they may close out the evaluation at their level as a final evaluator, unless
they refer the evaluation. When the rater/additional rater is a O-6 or civilian (GS-15 or above) who
works directly for the senior rater, and the ratee is not TIG eligible for senior rater endorsement,
the EPR will be closed out by the rater/additional rater [deputy evaluator]. When the rater is a
senior rater or the Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force, the EPR will close-out at their level.
Final Out—The day before an individual's departure from the member’s station for PCS,
retirement, separation, terminal leave, leave in conjunction with PCS, or unit PCA.
Forced Distributor (FD) (also referred to as FDID authority)—The evaluator designated to
complete the Promotion Recommendation section of the DAF Form 910. For
wing/delta/group/squadron- level organizational structures, the FD will be the G-series orders
commander or civilian director (delegable to section commander or equivalent only for non-
TIG/TIS eligibles). For wings, the FD is the vice commander, delegable to the Director of Staff.
Within MAJCOMs, FLDCOMs, CCMDs, FOAs, DRUs, NAFs, and Centers, the FD will be the
military or civilian director. For MAJCOM, FLDCOM, and CCMD commanders, the FD will be
the vice commander. When there is a subordinate organization/unit below the director and the
subordinate organization’s unit commander is on G- Series orders, the subordinate organization’s
commander will serve as the FD, not the parent organization commander/director. Note: If the
officer in one of these positions is from a sister- service, they must be an O-5 or higher to serve as
a FD.
Forced Distributor Identification—A nine-digit code (first two digits is the Management ID; the
third, fourth and fifth digits are the Senior Rater code; sixth, seventh, eighth and ninth digits are
340 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
the last four of the unit PAS code) which will provide identification to the PAS codes just as with
the Senior Rater IDs.
Frock—The practice of a commissioned or noncommissioned officer selected for promotion
wearing the insignia of the higher grade before the official date of promotion.
Inappropriate Statements—Statements from inappropriate items that evaluators must not
consider or refer to when recording performance.
Individual Mobilization Augmentee (IMA)—An individual filling a funded authorization
identified as augmenting the RegAF components within departments or agencies of the U.S.
Government. This is further defined by Joint Publication 1-02 which states, in part: an individual
reservist attending drills who receives training and is pre-assigned to an active component
organization, or a Selective Service System billet that must be filled on, or shortly after,
mobilization.
Mandatory Comments—Comments evaluators must include in EPRs, OPRs, and TRs (see
paragraph 1.11.).
Matter of Record—Evaluations that have been completed, signed, and loaded into ARMS/PRDA.
Evaluations are considered working copies until they become a matter of record.
Military and Civilian Grade Equivalents—For the purposes of this instruction, it is necessary
to equate certain military grades with civilian grades. The appropriate authority, as listed below,
determines equivalency based on the responsibilities and location of the civilian position in the
rating chain (see AFI 36-3026V1, Identification Cards for Members of the Uniformed Services,
their Eligible Family Members, and Other Eligible Personnel, Table A13.2 for grade comparison
chart).
a. For officer grades—The Reviewer/Senior Rater determines equivalency for Raters and
Additional Raters. The Management Level determines equivalency for Reviewer/Senior Rater
designations.
b. For CMSgts selects and CMSgts (AF Form 912)—The Management Level determines
equivalency for Senior Rater designations.
c. For MSgt selects, MSgts, SMSgt selects and SMSgts (AF Form 911)—The unit commander
determines equivalency for all evaluators (except for the Final Evaluator when the Final
Evaluator is also the Senior Rater— the Management Level determines Senior Rater
designations).
d. For AB/Spc1 through TSgt (DAF Form 910)—The unit commander determines equivalency
for Raters. Additional Raters must meet the grade requirements in paragraph1.6.3. For civilian
personnel in categories other than General Schedule to endorse an DAF Form 910 as the
additional Rater the unit commander must submit a request for an exception to policy to the
installation commander (with information copy to the MAJCOM or FLDCOM and AFPC). This
request must clearly outline the desired additional rater’s responsibilities and position in the
rating chain and verify he or she has been trained and is familiar with EES requirements and
procedures. While the installation commander has initial approval/disapproval authority, AFPC
has final disapproval authority. Unit commanders may appeal an AFPC disapproval by
submitting additional justification to AFPC/DP3SP, with information copy to the installation
commander and MAJCOM or FLDCOM.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 341
Military Director—The military director designated to lead a unit/organization. Also see Other
Authorized Reviewers.
Military Technician (Dual Status)—Refers to members employed under 10 U.S.C § 10216 or
32 U.S.C. § 709. Follow ARC /ANG Non-AGR (Drill Status) for OPR/EPR policy. Technicians
are considered drill status guardsmen/traditional reservists for reporting and rating purposes under
their military rating chain.
Management Level (ML)—DoD organizations (i.e., major command) where the senior official
evaluations directly to the SecDef, SecAF, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff, Chief of Staff, United
States Air Force (CSAF), Chief of Space Operations (CSO) or State Adjutant General or Governor.
Only the CSAF or CSO may approve exceptions; however, the HAF DCS, Personnel, may exercise
similar authority in cases involving the Management Levels of general officers. No individual can
serve as the head of two separate Management Levels for the same board, unless the individual is
serving in a dual-hatted capacity. As used in this instruction, Management Level also refers to the
personnel activity that supports the senior official.
Management Level Control Group (Applies to GOs)—The number of promotion eligible
general officers assigned to a Management Level, subdivided by grade and competitive category.
Management Level Review (MLR)—A process used in the Promotion Recommendation phase
of the Officer Evaluation System (Chapter 8).
Management Level Student—Receives TRs and normal PRFs. The eligible officers’ records
meet the respective Management Level evaluation board as a separate category. Training is within
the eligible officer's utilization field.
Military Personnel Record Group (MPerRGp)—Consists of Officer Selection Record Group,
Senior Noncommissioned Officer (SNCO) Selection Record (AD only), and Correspondence and
Miscellaneous Record Group (officer and enlisted). The MPerRGp is maintained at AFPC for
RegAF members, and at ARPC for ARC members.
Noncombat Ports and MPFs—All ports and MPFs not falling within either the combat zone or
communications zone.
Non Extended Active Duty (Non—Extended Active Duty)—An ARC member who is assigned
to an Air National Guard or Air Force Reserve unit, performs regularly schedule drills (Unit
Training Assembly), annual training, and/or Equivalent Training. This includes Drill Status
Guardsmen, unit traditional reservist or Individual Reservist while in a Title 10 or Title 32 status.
These members are not on an Active Duty tour (ex: Active Guard Reservist (AGR) or Voluntary
Limited Period of Active Duty [VLPAD]), however they may be on long tour such as military
personnel appropriation (MPA) or reserve personnel Appropriations (RPA) orders.
Non-Line—As used in this instruction, non-line is a collective general reference to chaplains
(AFSC 52RX), and health profession officers (AFSC 4XXX).
Offices of Record—The offices which maintain evaluations (original or copies).
Old Guy/New Guy—a report that shows new members to a unit and members who have departed
a unit.
Organizational Climate—The way in which members in a unit perceive and characterize their
unit environment.
342 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Other Authorized Reviewer—The unit commander/military or civilian director may designate
in writing a senior official within his/her unit to perform the unit commander’s/military or civilian
director’s review. If a flag officer is an evaluator on the AF Form 911 (only), he/she will serve as
an “Other Authorized Reviewer” in Section VIII, Unit Commander/Military or Civilian
Director/Other Authorized Reviewer. DAF Form 910 must return to the Force Distributor for final
endorsement and the AF Form 912 must return to the Senior Rater for final endorsement regardless
of a flag officer endorsement within the evaluation. In MAJCOM/FLDCOM/CCMD organizations
the management level may designate in writing a senior Air Force or Space Force official within
subordinate elements of the staff to serve as a “other authorized reviewer” (e.g., Director of Staff,
Director of Public Affairs, etc.).
Parent Management Level—The management level of a ratee’s permanently assigned
unit/organization.
P-Rate—The promotion rate that guarantees the minimum promotion rate for eligible officers
receiving a “Promote” recommendation.
Performance Feedback—A progress evaluation from raters to ratees.
Period of Report—The length of time covered by an evaluation.
Period of Supervision—The period of time a member is under the supervision of a rater.
PRF Accounting Date—The date that determines the Senior Rater responsible for PRF
preparation. The Senior Rater for the unit the eligible officer is assigned on this date is the Senior
Rater for the promotion cycle. For officers in grades lieutenant colonel and below, it is
approximately 150 calendar days prior to the Central Selection Board convening date. For colonel,
it is 60 calendar days prior to the Central Selection Board convening date.
PRF Accounting Date (Replacing)—The date that determines the Senior Rater responsible for
PRF preparation. The Senior Rater for the unit the eligible officer is assigned on this date is the
Senior Rater for the promotion cycle. For officers in grades lieutenant colonel and below, it is
approximately 150 calendar days prior to the Central Selection Board convening date. For officers
in the grade of colonel, it is approximately 210 calendar days prior to the Central Selection Board.
PRF Allocation Date—Sixty-six calendar days before a selection board, when “Definitely
Promote” allocations are final (does not apply to ARC).
PRF Cutoff Date—Sixty calendar days prior to the selection board, when final PRF processing
begins. PRFs cannot be completed prior to this date (does not apply to ARC).
Primary Stratification—The first level of stratification evaluators must use to ground a
stratification statement. Primary stratifications are grade stratifications that will only include
officers in the same grade (e.g., first lieutenants, captains, majors, lieutenant colonels, and
colonels) and must include all military officers in that grade under the evaluator’s scope of rating
responsibility and may not include officers who are assigned within another HLR’s scope of rating
responsibility. Grade stratifications may not include civilian grades or civilian “equivalents” in
the denominator pool. The following grade stratifications are authorized primary stratification
peer groups: (1) USAF or USSF officers, (2) DAF officers, (3) Joint officers, or (4) Reserve
Participation category. A primary stratification must be used in order to use a secondary
stratification. See paragraphs 3.15.6.6 and 3.15.7.3.1 for promotion “selects.”
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 343
“Promote (P)” (lieutenant colonels and below)—Recommendation on AF Form 709 that says
the ratee is qualified for promotion and should compete at the Central Selection Board on the basis
of performance, performance-based potential, and broader considerations; (colonels only) --
Recommendation of AF Form 709 which indicates an officer is making a valuable contribution to
the mission and has potential for promotion.
Ratee—The individual being rated.
Rater (officer and enlisted)—The official (usually the ratee's immediate supervisor) designated
by management to provide a ratee periodic performance feedback and initiate performance
evaluations. The rater may be an officer or Noncommissioned Officer (for enlisted ratees) of a
United States or foreign military service serving in a grade equal to or higher than the ratee, or a
civilian in a supervisory position that is higher than the ratee in the ratee’s rating chain.
Management may appoint raters serving in the same grade as ratees without regard to date of rank.
(Enlisted)--A civilian rater must be at least a GS-7 or a comparable grade or higher. RegAF
members in the grade of SrA may serve as raters only if they have completed the
Noncommissioned Officer Preparatory Course or the Airman Leadership Course. Only non-
active-duty AFR members in the grade of SSgt or above may serve as raters.
Rater’s Rater (officer)—The second official in the rating chain, after the rater, serving in a grade
equal to or higher than the rater and in a grade higher than the ratee. See paragraph 1.6.4 for other
restrictions. (Enlisted)--The second official in the rating chain, after the rater, serving in a grade
equal to or higher than the rater (for TSgts and below, at least the grade of MSgt or civilian
equivalent).
Rating Chain—The succession of officials responsible for preparing evaluations. Evaluators
other than the rater may be assigned after the close-out date. Commanders set up the rating chain
within their organization. The rating chain is normally the same as the supervisory chain.
Exceptions: An individual in the supervisory chain may not be an EPR evaluator when the ratee
is a TSgt or below and the rater’s rater does not meet the minimum grade requirement to be the
additional rater. When the ratee is a MSgt or higher, the final evaluator (AF Form 911, Section IX)
does not have to be the immediate supervisor of the additional rater. Flexibility in this case lets
authorities better distinguish between individuals with similar performance records. When the
senior rater identification designates more than one position as a senior rater within a common
rating chain (Example: Headquarters Chief of Staff, vice commander, and commander), the
senior rater who signs the evaluation does not have to be the rater’s rater, but must be the senior
rater designated for the ratee’s grade and assigned PAS code (only one senior rater may sign an
evaluation).
Recommendation Only PRF—Refer to paragraph 8.1.5.6. Does not apply to Reserve of the Air
Force.
Record of Performance—Consists of the following AF Forms (when filed in the Officer
Selection Record (OSR): AF Forms 707; AF Forms 707A and AF Forms 707B; AF Forms 709;
Air Force Forms 475; Form 77 and Officer Performance Brief. Evaluators may also use Letter of
Evaluation (LOE) filed in the CSS/HR Specialist.
Referral Evaluation—A performance evaluation that contains any of the following is a referral:
(a) Comments in any OPR, EPR, LOE or Training Report, regardless of the ratings if applicable,
or the attachments to that evaluation, that are derogatory in nature, imply or refer to behavior
344 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
incompatible with, or not meeting minimum acceptable standards of personal or professional
conduct, character, judgment or integrity, and/or refer to disciplinary actions. This includes, but is
not limited to, comments regarding omissions or misrepresentation of facts in official statements
or documents, financial irresponsibility, mismanagement of personal or government affairs,
confirmed incidents of discrimination or mistreatment, illegal use or possession of drugs, Absent
Without Leave, Article 15 actions, and conviction by court-martial.
(b) (USSF only) An officer fails to meet standards in any one of the listed performance factors,
in Section III or Section IX of the OPR, the overall evaluation will be a "Does Not Meet
Standards" evaluation and the evaluation must be referred.
Relieved From Supervisory Responsibility—For evaluation purposes, this means an individual
was removed from supervisory duties due to either personal or professional shortcomings or
misconduct that, in the supervisor’s view, made the member incapable of handling, or unsuitable
for holding, the position. Personnel removed from supervisory responsibility must be notified in
writing and acknowledge understanding.
Reserve Active Status List (RASL)—A list of all ARC officers in an active status, not on the
Active Duty List, and in the order of seniority of the grade in which they are serving. Officers
serving in the same grade are carried in order of their date of rank to that grade. The RASL for the
Air Force shall include officers in the Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve. Except as
otherwise provided by law, an officer must be on the RASL to be eligible for consideration for
selection for promotion, continuation, or selective early removal as a member of the Reserve of
the Air Force.
Reviewer—The third evaluator on an Officer Performance Report (see paragraph 1.6.5.).
Reviewing Official—Any intermediate-level supervisor above the rater, but below the
Management Level.
Routinely—A repeated inability to meet established DAF standards and/or expectations that
would render the aggregated performance assessment over the entire reporting period as below
standards.
Secondary Stratification—The second level of stratification (and final [tertiary stratifications and
beyond are not authorized]) evaluators may use to stratify an officer. To use a secondary
stratification, the officer must first earn a primary stratification on their evaluation to ground the
secondary stratification statement and communicate the clearest depiction of where an officer
stands for all future evaluation readers. See paragraph 3.15.7.3.1 for the exception on promotion
“selects.” An evaluator may use one of the following peer groups as a secondary stratification: (1)
developmental category, (2) USAF or USSF grade, (3) subordinate echelon grade, or (4) duty
position.
Select Status—When a member has been selected for promotion to the next higher grade.
Members who turn down their promotion to the next higher grade are removed from select status.
The use of the select status for FGO evaluations corresponds to the public release date of promotion
to the next higher grade or once an officer’s promotion nomination has been transmitted to the
White House. The use of the select status for first lieutenants selected to captain corresponds to
the date of AFPC or ARPC public release of the promotion list or once SecDef approves the
promotion lists. The use of “select” is not utilized for lieutenant evaluations.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 345
Senior Rater (Officer)—The evaluator designated by the Management Level who completes the
PRF and also serves as reviewer on the OPR. Senior raters must be in a position to have personal
knowledge or access to personal knowledge of the ratee's performance. They must also have the
scope of responsibility and breadth of experience to assess performance and its significance as it
relates to potential for promotion. The same senior rater normally evaluates all officers in an
organization in a particular grade and promotion zone. For all USAF and RegAF majors and below,
the senior rater must be at least a colonel (or equivalent) serving as a wing commander or
equivalent. For all USAF and RegAF lieutenant colonels and colonels, the senior rater must be a
general officer (or equivalent) and will be the first general officer in the rating chain
AFPC/DPMSPE Active Duty List or AFRC/A1 (AFR unit) must approve exceptions. For all
USSF majors and below, the senior rater must be at least a colonel/GS-15/NH-IV/equivalent
serving as a delta commander, senior materiel leader-upper, FLDCOM director, or equivalent
position. For all USSF colonels and lieutenant colonels, the senior rater must be a general
officer/senior executive service employee (SES)/equivalent and will be the first general
officer/SES/equivalent in the rating chain.
Senior Rater (Enlisted)—Position that the MAJCOM or FLDCOM, field operating agency, direct
reporting unit, and other organizations with Air Force enlisted personnel designated to be the
highest-level endorser in the ratee's rating chain. For RegAF and ARC members, senior raters must
be at least a colonel or civilian equivalent (GS-15 or higher), serving as a wing commander or
equivalent.
Senior Rater Identification Code—A five-character code identifying a senior rater position as
the MAJCOM or FLDCOM or Management Level specifies.
Significant Disagreement—The disagreement by an evaluator with the previous evaluator that
results in one of the following: A change of any Performance Factor rating in any of the
performance assessments; or any statement anywhere in an OPR that indicates obvious
disagreement with the previous evaluator.
Significantly—A single instance where failure to meet established DAF standards and/or
expectations is either egregious in nature or so far short of a standard that it impacts overall
aggregated performance assessment.
Single Evaluator—An individual (colonel/0-6 or equivalent) who may close out an EPR with a
single signature (also see the definition of Final Evaluator). Individual must meet both grade
requirements and the evaluator requirements for each section of the applicable evaluation form
(Example: must meet both grade requirements as an O-6 [or equivalent/higher grade] and must
meet the definition of a “unit commander/military or civilian director/other authorized reviewer”).
An O-6 or equivalent in and of themselves meet the grade requirement to serve as a final [deputy]
evaluator on the AF Form 911, and/or as a final [senior rater] evaluator on the AF Form 911 and
AF Form 912, provided they are designated as a senior rater by the management level; however,
they must also meet the necessary requirements as a unit commander/ military or civilian
director/other authorized reviewer (see definition of unit commander/military or civilian
director/other authorized reviewer) to sign the entire evaluation as a “single evaluator”.
Single Senior Rater—The Single Senior rater is not the head of the management level but is the
only senior rater who has In-or-Above-the-Promotion Zone and/or non-line/LAF-J Below-the-
Promotion Zone eligible. The Management Level Review process must review PRFs.
346 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Sole Senior Rater—The Sole Senior Rater is the head of the Management Level and is the only
senior rater who has In-or-Above-the-Promotion Zone and/or non-line/LAF-J Below-the-
Promotion Zone eligible for a specific board. The Sole Senior Rater awards all PRF
recommendations; however, the HAF Management Level Review must review all PRF ratings.
Static Close-Out Date (SCOD)—The date that all enlisted evaluations will close-out for a specific
grade. Also, the date used to determine the final TIG/TIS eligible pool for senior rater
endorsement/stratification and forced distribution allocations.
Stratification—Quantitative comparison of an individual standing among peers within a definable
group and within a specific evaluator’s scope of authority (i.e., direct rating chain).
Statutory Tour—A controlled tour of active duty service. Usually, a precise number of years at a
specific location.
Stop File—Used to award a “Do Not Promote This Board” recommendation when substantiated
derogatory information has been received since departure from previous assignment if time does
not allow for not-qualified-for-promotion action processing. A stop file must be submitted in
writing through the management level to AFPC/DPMSPE. Gaining senior raters must get the
concurrence of the gaining MLR president and ensure the losing senior rater is informed of the
“Do Not Promote This Board” action. This will allow the opportunity for possible redistribution
of any previously awarded “Definitely Promote” recommendations to other deserving officers
prior to the central selection board.
Temporary Management Level—The management level for a ratee who is temporarily assigned
to a unit/organization.
Total Force Service Center (TFSC)—Formerly known as the Air Force Contact Center (AFCC).
When referenced, use the applicable components TFSC, i.e., RegAF would use the TFSC at AFPC
and the ANG AFR would use the TFSC at ARPC.
Unit Commander/Military or Civilian Director—The military service member designated as
the director of, or in command of, a unit (PAS code[s]). A civilian equivalent, assigned to the
position of director, or unit director, responsible for the unit (PAS code [s]). See paragraph 1.6.7.
Whole Airman Concept—Factors included in the whole person assessment include job
performance, leadership, professional competence, breadth and depth of experience, job
responsibility, academic and professional military education, and specific achievements.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 347
Attachment 2
APPEAL GUIDANCE FOR APPLICANTS
A2.1. Overview. In this attachment, the term "evaluation" encompasses all versions of enlisted
and officer performance reports, training reports, letters of evaluation, promotion recommendation
forms, retention recommendation forms and any other forms used by selective early retirement
boards and reduction in force separation boards. Complying with the following guidelines does
not guarantee a favorable decision; however, not complying may cause the board to delay its
decision or return the application without action.
A2.2. Documenting an Appeal. Documentation must be relevant, accurate, and clear. Do not
submit general documentation such as letters of appreciation or character reference statements.
Also, quantity does not equate to quality. If the reason a particular item of evidence is not obvious,
attach an explanation of its relevancy to the item. If the application has multiple attachments, use
tabs to separate them. Before submitting an appeal, review the documentation to ensure it is:
A2.2.1. From a credible source. Information from a person with firsthand or expert knowledge
of the situation is an example.
A2.2.2. Relevant to the time and issue. Evaluations assess performance over a specific period
of time and documentation must relate to that period.
A2.2.3. Factual. Perceived personality conflict or general character references are subjective,
not factual. As much as possible, provide information that is objective.
A2.3. Statements. The most effective pieces of evidence are statements from the evaluator(s)
who signed the contested evaluation. These statements should:
A2.3.1. Cite important facts or circumstances that were unknown when the evaluators signed
the evaluation.
A2.3.2. Detail the error or injustice.
A2.3.3. Explain how and when it was discovered.
A2.3.4. Include the correct information.
A2.3.5. Relate to the contested reporting period.
A2.3.6. Address the allegations and substantially challenge or disprove comments or ratings
in the evaluation.
A2.4. Time Limit Waivers. The applicant can request a waiver of the 3-year time limit by citing
unusual circumstances that prevented filing the appeal in a timely manner. However, ratees are
responsible for reviewing their records at least annually for accuracy and the board can consider
the due diligence of the applicant to apply for correction. Applications that do not include a waiver
will be returned without action. Grounds for a waiver do not include:
A2.4.1. Failing to understand the appeals process.
A2.4.2. Being discouraged from appealing by superiors, peers, or counselors.
A2.4.3. Failing to understand the career impact in later years.
348 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
A2.5. Common Appeal Reasons and Related Documentation Requirements. Some common
reasons for appealing and types of documentation are outlined below. Complying with these
guidelines does not guarantee approval of an appeal.
A2.5.1. Impact on Promotion or Career Opportunity. An evaluation is not erroneous or unfair
because the applicant believes it contributed to a non-selection for promotion or may impact
future promotion or career opportunities. The board will focus on the evaluation only. The
simple willingness by evaluators to upgrade, rewrite, or void an evaluation is not a valid basis
for doing so. Example: Requests to add optional statements such as developmental
education/professional military education, assignment/job/command "push" recommendation,
add an omitted award or stratification to an evaluation or PRF will normally not form the basis
for a successful appeal. These statements are not mandatory for inclusion and their omission
does not make the evaluation inaccurate. It must be proven the evaluation is erroneous or
unjust based on its content.
A2.5.2. Ratings and Comments Inconsistent with Prior or Subsequent Evaluations. Ratings
are not erroneous or unjust simply because they are inconsistent with previous ratings. An
evaluation documents performance during a specific period and reflects performance, conduct,
and potential at that time, in that position. An ability to function well in one position at a given
time may change in another job at another time. Sometimes an individual can stay in the same
job and a change in supervisors will produce a change in performance standards which,
depending on how well the individual adapts, could cause a marked change in the next
evaluation. The board will not approve requests to void evaluations simply because they are
inconsistent with other evaluations.
A2.5.3. Comments Inconsistent with Assigned Ratings. Retrospective views of facts and
circumstances, months or even years after the evaluation was written, will usually not
overcome the board's presumption that the initial assessment remains valid.
A2.5.4. Deflationary Rating Programs. Evaluators must accurately assess personnel and
control inflation. Therefore, to appeal on this basis must clearly establish that the evaluator
did not use the DAF evaluation policy in effect at the time.
A2.5.5. Personality Conflict. Provide firsthand evidence that clearly shows how the conflict
prevented the evaluator from preparing a fair and accurate evaluation. If other evaluators
support an appeal because they were unaware of a conflict at the time, they should provide
specific information (and cite their sources) which leads them to believe the evaluation is not
an objective assessment.
A2.5.6. Coercion by Superiors. The board seriously and carefully evaluates any allegation of
coercion by superiors. The DAF requires endorsers, reviewers, and commanders to review
evaluations for quality and accuracy. These officials must reject poorly prepared evaluations
and downgrade or reject inflated evaluations. Evaluators who change evaluations after talking
with a superior have not necessarily been coerced. Clear evidence must exist proving that the
superior violated the evaluators’ rating rights. Supporting statements must identify the person
who did the coercing, list the specific threats that were made, and identify any witnesses who
can corroborate the incident.
A2.5.7. Undue Emphasis on Isolated Incidents. Evaluators should consider isolated incidents,
their significance, and the frequency with which they occurred in assessing performance and
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 349
potential. Retrospective statements from evaluators prepared several months (or even years)
after the incident or following a period of improved performance do not carry as much weight
as assessments made when the facts and circumstances were fresh in their minds. To convince
the board, evaluators must provide specific information about the incident and why they now
believe it was overly emphasized.
A2.5.8. Lack of Counseling or Feedback. The lack of counseling or feedback, by itself, is not
sufficient to challenge the accuracy or validity of an evaluation. Documentation should
provide specific information about how the lack of counseling or feedback resulted in the
unfair evaluation so the board can make a reasoned judgment on the appeal. Finally, every
Airman and Guardian should know the existing standards for indebtedness, weight, fitness.
Lack of counseling in these areas provides no valid basis for voiding an evaluation.
A2.5.9. Alleged Discrimination or Unfair Treatment. DAF members must report any form of
discrimination to their supervisors or commander. In cases involving discrimination, the best
evidence is an official Equal Opportunity and Treatment investigation, reviewed and validated
by appropriate officials. Statements from officials in the rating chain or other credible sources
who have firsthand knowledge of the discrimination may also be used.
A2.5.10. Evaluation Completed on Wrong Form. The board does not void an evaluation
because it was completed on the wrong form. The evaluation will either be re-accomplished
or superimposed on the correct form.
A2.5.11. Administrative Issues. The board does not normally void evaluations because of
administrative errors. Proof that the evaluation would have been substantially different without
the error should be provided. Normal procedure is to correct the administrative error rather
than void the evaluation.
A2.5.12. Evaluation Inconsistent with Awards or Decorations Covering the Same Reporting
Period. Citations are not specific enough to offset the comments and ratings in an evaluation.
Awards and decorations are usually submitted by members of the rating chain who are fully
aware of the contested evaluation. Therefore, an approved award or decoration alone does not
challenge the accuracy of an evaluation.
A2.5.13. Personal Opinions and Unsupported Allegations. Provide factual, specific, and
substantiated information that is from credible officials and is based on firsthand observation
or knowledge. Avoid submitting unsubstantiated statements or opinions about motives.
A2.5.14. Mismarked Ratings. The instructions governing the Officer and Enlisted Evaluation
Systems clearly require evaluators (and no one else) to mark evaluations and prohibit them
from signing blank or unmarked forms. Statements from all evaluators who signed the
evaluation are needed. These statements must fully explain how the error occurred and why
the evaluators did not notice the error when they signed the evaluation. Sometimes the typist
or administrative section is blamed for such errors, in which case a statement from them can
help. If the unit has a policy which requires raters to sign blank forms, or prohibits them from
marking their ratings, a statement from the unit commander (or other person that imposed and
enforced the policy) will be needed. The board usually directs the evaluation be corrected or
re-accomplished rather than voided.
A2.5.15. Evaluation Not Endorsed by Mandatory Endorser. An evaluation not endorsed at
the required level is normally corrected instead of voided. Identify the proper mandatory
350 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
endorser and obtain the omitted endorsement. The evaluation may be re-accomplished, or the
endorsement placed in the correct section of a blank form and signed. Include statements from
the evaluators explaining the error.
A2.5.16. Lack of Observation. Applications based on the fact that evaluators were
geographically separated, working on a different shift, or new to the job require conclusive
documentation showing there was no valid basis on which to assess performance.
A2.5.17. Evaluation Not Written by Designated Rater. The DAF does not require the
designated rater to be the immediate supervisor. Inaccurate designations and failures to change
raters can occur when personnel are reassigned, work centers reorganized, functional areas or
units realigned. To prove a case, a member will need statements from both the individuals
who signed the evaluation and from the individuals who believe they should have written the
evaluation. They should cite the “FROM” and “THRU” dates of supervision and explain what
happened. The erroneous evaluator must clearly explain why they wrote and signed the
evaluation when they were not the rater. Likewise, the actual evaluator must explain why they
did not write the evaluation even though they were supposed to. Also helpful is a statement
from the unit commander, if possible, providing specific information.
A2.5.18. Insufficient Supervision. The following is needed to appeal based on insufficient
supervision:
A2.5.18.1. Computer-generated products or other documents that substantiate when
supervision began and ended.
A2.5.18.2. Understand that on-the-job training records, feedback notices, and performance
feedback worksheets do not document the date supervision began. They document only
that an on-the-job training entry was made, a feedback notice produced, or a feedback
session took place.
A2.5.18.3. Often, evaluators feel that days of supervision minimums are not sufficient
time to evaluate a ratee. However, DAF standards establish that the minimum days are
adequate to be able to provide a valid assessment. This standard applies DAF-wide and
appeals based on the rater’s belief that minimums are not enough time are not approved.
A2.5.19. Memorandum of Mitigation. A memorandum of mitigation may be attached to an
evaluation from an evaluator who signed the original evaluation or from someone in the rating
chain at the time of the original evaluation. The memorandum must present information that
was not known at the time of the evaluation's preparation and must explain the comments or
ratings. A memorandum of mitigation may not be used simply to add information to an
evaluation when there was not enough space on the original evaluation to include it. The
memorandum must be no more than a single, typed page. It must not discuss promotion status
or potential or any other subject or material if this information was not allowed in the original
evaluation. Do not emphasize comments by using bold type, underlines, unusual fonts, etc.
A2.5.20. Lack of Training. Provide supporting statements from rating chain officials who can
give specific information about the training problem and its impact on the evaluation. Since
failing to provide training and failing to document training are different problems, on the job
training records, reviews of on-the-job training records, and on the job training inspection
reports do not prove training was not conducted, only that training was not documented.
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 351
A2.5.21. Forged Signature. Allegations of a forged signature on an evaluation must be
confirmed by a notarized statement from the actual evaluator or by the results of an
investigation.
A2.5.22. Fitness. Provide relevant justification as to why the fitness area/statement is
incorrect. Any request without supporting documents will be returned or not favorably
considered.
A2.5.23. Re-accomplishing an evaluation. Along with supporting documentations, furnish a
substitute evaluation in the appeal case. The substitute evaluation must:
A2.5.23.1. Be signed by all the evaluators who signed the original evaluation (this includes
the commander on enlisted evaluations). If an evaluator cannot be located, submit evidence
of all attempts to locate the missing evaluator (e.g., certified mail receipt, emails, postal
service). After all attempts have been exhausted, contact AFPC/DPMSPE for guidance.
A2.5.23.2. Be on the correct form not only for the grade, but also for the time the original
evaluation was written. Example: If re-accomplishing a PRF for a CY93 Board, the Aug
88 version of the AF Form 709 must be used, not the Jun 95 edition of the form. Similarly,
if re-accomplishing an enlisted evaluation which has a close-out date of Jan 95, the
substitute must be on the Jan 93 edition of Forms 910/911, not the Jun 95 version.
A2.6. Special Information on Appealing DAF Form 709, Promotion Recommendation Form
(PRF). (Note: MLR process does not apply to the AFR or USSF).
A2.6.1. General Information. A material error in the PRF itself, substantive changes to the
record of performance used to assess performance-based potential, or a material error in the
PRF preparation process may justify changes to the PRF. Normally, comments and
recommendations are required from the senior rater who signed the PRF and the MLR
President who reviewed it. If the senior rater is deceased or retired and not available, the
president who originally reviewed the PRF may act instead. When the senior rater is available,
but the original president is deceased or retired and not available, the current president can act
in their place. Note: An evaluator is considered not available when they are incapacitated or,
after reasonable efforts, cannot be located or contacted. Include in the application
documentation that shows when and how attempts to contact an evaluator, such as certified
mail receipts. An evaluator will not be substituted or bypassed simply because they will not
support an application.
A2.6.1.1. Substantive additions, deletions, changes, or corrections to an officer's record of
performance include voiding a referral or negative evaluation, adding a previously missing
officer evaluation or TR, removing a negative endorsement or adding a positive one, or
replacing an evaluation with a substantially different one. The change must, in effect,
remove negative information from an officer’s record or add positive information which
was not previously known. A simple administrative change to an evaluation does not meet
this criteria.
A2.6.1.2. Senior rater and MLR presidents who provide comments and recommendations
must carefully consider what, if any, impact the correction or change may have had on the
final PRF content, rating, or the preparation process. They will need to explain the change
to the record of performance, its impact on the PRF, and how the requested PRF action
relates to the changed record of performance. Appeals based on errors in the preparation
352 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
process must also be fully explained and substantiated. Senior raters must weigh the impact
of the processing error on the PRF and explain how the error justifies the requested PRF
change.
A2.6.1.3. The management level that initially processed the PRF can best route PRF
appeals to the appropriate MLR president. Since management levels may have different
procedures for processing PRF appeals, contact the appropriate one for instructions. If the
management level no longer exists, contact AFPC/DPMSPE for instructions.
A2.6.2. PRF Appeal Requirements. It is impossible to list exact instructions for each type of
appeal; so, if necessary, contact AFPC/DPMSPE or ARPC/PB for guidance on appeals not
covered in this instruction. The following list describes minimum required documentation for
the board to reach a fair and equitable decision on the appeal:
A2.6.2.1. Voiding a PRF. Provide substantial evidence proving the PRF does not contain
a valid promotion potential assessment, and that it is not possible to correct the form.
A2.6.2.2. Changing the promotion recommendation requires the concurrence of both the
senior rater and MLR president. The PRF should “provide key performance factors from
the officer’s entire career.” The space on the form is limited and it is not usually possible
to describe every achievement in an officer’s career. The senior rater bears the
responsibility of selecting what to include in the PRF, and what to leave out, which portions
of the officer’s career to concentrate on, and which portions to have supported by the
record. While inputs from subordinate commanders may be requested, to do so is not
mandatory. To change the promotion recommendation, the senior rater will need to
demonstrate there was a material error in the PRF; a material error in the record of
performance which substantially impacted the content of the PRF; or a material error in the
process by which the PRF was crafted. In all instances, the requested change to the
promotion recommendation must be related to the documented error. Appeals to rewrite
the promotion recommendation simply to include different, but previously known or
documented accomplishments will not be approved.
A2.6.2.3. Changing the overall promotion recommendation to a "Promote"
recommendation requires the concurrence of both the senior rater and MLR president. The
senior rater provides detailed information about the circumstances surrounding the
requested change and the rationale for the correction. The MLR president reviews the
request and recommends for or against the change. The senior rater and MLR president
should not support a requested change to the PRF unless a material error exists.
A2.6.2.4. Changing the overall promotion recommendation to a “Definitely Promote”
recommendation must be fully justified and requires the concurrence of both the senior
rater and MLR president. In the promotion process, “Definitely Promote”
recommendations are strictly controlled and awarded after a competitive review of the
senior rater’s pool of eligible members identifies the top officers. The MLR validates the
senior rater’s decision and conducts a similar competitive review in awarding carry-over
or aggregate “Definitely Promote” recommendations. In determining whether to seek
award of a “Definitely Promote” recommendation via an appeal, senior raters and MLR
presidents must, as much as possible, replicate the original competitive process. Senior
raters and MLRs needing assistance in identifying their original pool of eligible officers
should contact AFPC/DPMSPE, 550 C Street West, Suite 7, Joint Base San Antonio-
DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023 353
Randolph, TX 78150-4709 to obtain a MEL and copies of records of performance which
may be needed for the board in question. The senior rater details the circumstances
surrounding the requested change, the rationale for the correction, and the method (an
earned “Definitely Promote” allocation, aggregation or carry-over) by which the
“Definitely Promote” recommendation would have been awarded originally. As with other
PRF appeals, there must be a material error in the PRF, record of performance, or process,
and it must be shown how that error resulted in an erroneous rating. In addition:
A2.6.2.4.1. When the senior rater identifies an earned “Definitely Promote” allocation,
they certify that the applicant's corrected record would have been awarded a “Definitely
Promote” recommendation in competition with the senior rater’s original pool of
eligible officers. After reviewing the circumstances of the appeal and the applicant's
record, the MLR president recommends whether the “Definitely Promote”
recommendation should be confirmed.
A2.6.2.4.2. If the senior rater believes a “Definitely Promote” recommendation would
have been awarded under aggregation or carry-over, the Management Level Review
President reviews the request, the circumstances surrounding the error, and its impact
on the strength of the applicant’s record. The MLR president, after a competitive
review (see para 8.7), determines if the corrected record would have been sufficiently
strong to have earned a “Definitely Promote” recommendation at the original MLR,
and makes the appropriate recommendation.
A2.6.3. Changing PRFs reviewed by a USAF Student Evaluation Board or a USAF Evaluation
Board for Officers in Competitive Categories Other Than Line of the Air Force. The same
requirements listed above apply, except after meeting the senior rater’s requirement, forward
the appeal to AFPC/DPMSPE for processing. AFPC/DPMSPE serves as the management level
for these boards and will secure a recommendation from the MLR president.
A2.6.4. Board Review. The decision whether or not to grant or deny the appeal rests with the
board, which has the independent responsibility to make the determination. Senior rater, MLR
president, and other inputs and/or recommendations are factors which the board will consider
in making its determination. It is not bound by any of the recommendations. The board
determines the weight it will give to all such inputs.
A2.7. Special Information on Appealing AF Form 3538, Retention Recommendation Form (RRF).
A2.7.1. The board carefully evaluates retention recommendation form appeals and obtaining the
support outlined below does not guarantee approval, but is the minimum required for the board to reach
a fair and equitable decision.
A2.7.2. Voiding a Retention Recommendation Form. Evidence requirements are similar to evidence
requirements for voiding other evaluation types. Provide substantiating evidence that the form contains
an unjust or inaccurate assessment of potential for continued service.
A2.7.3. To change the narrative comments, or the retention recommendation, the support of the
evaluators who signed the form is needed. The first evaluator is generally the primary person to
substantiate the form is inaccurate. They detail the circumstances surrounding the error and explains
why it should be corrected. The second evaluator reviews the circumstances and provides a
recommendation. On occasion, the same person may be responsible for the first and second evaluators'
portions of the form. If major changes are needed, fill out a new form and attach it to the request for
correction.
354 DAFI36-2406 4 AUGUST 2023
Attachment 3
NON-RATED PERIOD MEMORANDUM
Example: (use appropriate organization letterhead) (Attachment XX) Non-rated Period(s)
Memorandum
MEMORANDUM FOR XX SQ/CC DATE
FROM: GRADE, LAST NAME, FIRST NAME, MI OF REQUESTING MEMBER (LAST 4 of
SSN)
SUBJECT: Non-rated Period(s) on (Enlisted/Officer) Performance Report
1. I am requesting a non-rated period on my next performance report in accordance with
DAFI 36-2406 paragraph 1.4.11.
2. As a reminder, we met on DD/MM/YYYY and discussed any reasonably foreseeable
career impacts with this request.
3. I am requesting a non-rated period to start on DD/MM/YYYY and end on
DD/MM/YYYY. (First request will not exceed 80 calendar days; any extensions will require an
additional letter and will not exceed 60-day increments)
4. If you have questions, please contact me at (requesting member’s contact information).
Requesting Member’s Signature Block
1st Ind, XX SQ/CC
MEMORANDUM FOR XX SQ/CSS (Evaluations Monitor)
I have considered (grade/name of requesting member)’s request and approve/recommend
disapproval the non-rated period from DD/MM/YYYY to DD/MM/YYYY.
If recommending disapproval, CC must provide justification for the recommendation and
forward to the requesting member’s wing commander/equivalent for final approval/disapproval
(may be delegated no further than vice commander/equivalent). This may be accomplished on
this memo or under a separate attachment.
Once signed, a copy will be provided to the requesting member and wing CVS office.
Unit/CC Signature Block
