AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

DOCKET NUMBER:  97-02681 

COUNSEL:  None 

HEARING DESIRED:  Yes 

4 

Applicant  requests  that  the  duty  title  on  his  Enlisted 
Performance Report  (EPR) closing 13 Feb 91 be changed from Ground 
Radio Technician to Noncommissioned Officer In Charge  (NCOIC) of 
Site Security and the duty title on the EPR closing 13 Feb 92 be 
changed  from  Ground  Radio  Equipment Technician  to  Land  Mobile 
Radio Manager.  Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A. 

The  appropriate Air  Force  offices evaluated  applicant's request 
and  provided  advisory  opinions  to  the  Board  recommending  the 
application be  denied  (Exhibit C).  The  advisory  opinions were 
forwarded to the applicant for review and  response  (Exhibit D). 
As of this date, no response has been received by this office. 

After  careful  consideration  of  applicant's  request  and  the 
available  evidence  of  record,  we  find  insufficient evidence  of 
error or injustice to warrant  corrective action.  The facts and 
opinions  stated in the  advisory  opinions  appear  to be  based  on 
the evidence of record and have not been  rebutted by  applicant. 
Absent persuasive  evidence  applicant was  denied rights to which 
entitled,  appropriate  regulations  were  not  followed,  or 
appropriate  standards  were  not  applied,  we  find  no  basis  to 
disturb the existing record. 

Accordingly, applicant's request is denied. 

The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been 
shown  that  a  personal  appearance  with  or  without  counsel will 
materially  add  to  our  understanding  of  the  issues  involved. 
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. 

The Board staff is directed to inform applicant of this decision. 
Applicant should also be informed that this decision is final and 
will  only be  reconsidered upon  the presentation of new relevant 
evidence  which  was  not  reasonably  available  at  the  time  the 
application was filed. 

Members  of  the  Board  Mr.  LeRoy  T .   Baseman,  Mr.  Michael  P. 
Higgins,  and  Mr.  Frederick  R.  Beaman,  111,  considered  this 
application on 20 January 1998 in accordance with the provisions 
of Air  Force Instruction 36-2603, and the governing statute, 10, 
U.S.C.  1552. 

A 

. BASEMAN 

Exhibits : 
A.  Applicant's DD Form 149 
B.  Available Master Personnel Records 
C.  Advisory Opinions 
D.  AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinions 

LeROY 
!C 
Panel Chair 

I 

4

.

D E P A R T M E N T   OF  T H E  A I R   FORCE 

 

H E A D Q U A R T E R S  A I R   F O R C E  P E R S O N N E L C E N T E R  

R A N D O L P H   A I R   F O R C E   B A S E  T E X A S  

MEMORANDUM FOR  AFPUDPPPAB 
AFPC/DPPAPC 
AFBCMR 
IN TURN 

FROM:  HQ AFPUDPPPWB 

550 C Street West, Ste 09 
Randolph AFB TX  78 150-47 1 1 

Requested Action.  The applicant is requesting the AFBCMR correct the duty title of his 
Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) closing 13 Feb 91 from Ground Radio Technician to NCOIC 
Site Security and the duty title of the EPR closing 13 Feb 92 from Ground Radio Equipment 
Technician to Land Mobile Radio Manager.  We will address the supplemental promotion 
consideration issue should the request be granted. 

Reason for Request.  Applicant believes the contested report is unjust because the duties 
described in these two EPRs were not those of a Ground Radio Technician but those of NCOIC 
Site Security and Land Mobile Radio Manager. 

Facts.  See Hq AFPC/DPPPAB Letter. 

Discussion.  In the Weighted Airman Promotion System (WAPS), the rating in Section 

IV (Promotion Recommendation), is used to determine the number of promotion points the 
member receives.  The duty title is not a factor in crediting promotion points.  Whether the duty 
titles are changed or not would have no impact on any previous promotion considerations or 
future consideration to MSgt. 

Recommendation.  We defer to the recommendation of Hq AFPUDPPPAB. 

Chief InquiriedAFBCMR Section 
Airman Promotion Branch 

--- 

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR  FORCE 

HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE PERSONNEL CENTER 

RANDOLPH AIR FORCE BASE TEXAS 

MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR 

FROM:  HQ AFPC/DPPPAB 

550 C Street West, Suite 8 
Randolph AFB TX  78 150-47 10 

15 Sep 97 

Requested Action.  Applicant requests duty title changes on enlisted performance reports 

(EPR) that closed out on 13 Feb 91 and  13 Feb 92. 

Basis for Reauest.  Applicant recently reviewed the contested EPRs and now believes the 

duty title on these reports do not accurately reflect the duties performed during the reporting 
period. 

Recommendation.  Time Bar.  If AFBCMR considers, deny due to lack of merit. By law, a 
claim must be filed within three years of the date of discovery of the alleged error or injustice (10 
U.S.C. 1552[b]). The contested report was discoverable when it became part of the applicant’s 
record.  The applicant has provided nothing to convince us the EPR was not discoverable until 
1 Mar 97 (application date), nor has he offered a reasonable explanation for filing late.  a l e  we 
would normally recommend the application be denied as untimely, we are aware that the 
AFBCMR has determined it must adhere to the decision in the case of Detweiler v. Pena, 
38F.3d591 @.C. Cir 1994)--which prevents application of the statute’s time bar if the applicant 
has filed within three years of separation or retirement. 

Facts and Comments: 

a.  Application is not timely. Applicant did not submit a similar appeal under AFI 
36-2401, Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Reports.  We did not return the application 
to the applicant because the contested reports are more than three years old. 

b.  AFR 39-62, The Enlisted Evaluation System, 1 May 89, is the governing 

directive. 

c.  In support of his appeal, the applicant submits copies of  the contested reports, 

and a copy of his duty titles extracted fiom the Headquarters Air Force (HAF) file. 

d.  Air Force policy is that an evaluation report is accurate as written when it 

becomes a matter of record.  It takes substantial evidence to the contrary to have a report 
changed or voided. On the EPR which closed out 13 Feb 9 1, the rater clearly stated that the 

applicant’s additional duty title was Site Security Noncommissioned Officer in Charge (NCOIC). 
If this had been his primary duty, the rater would have used it as the overall duty title in Block 11, 
Job Description.  The job description on the EPR closing out on 13 Feb 92, does not specifically 
say anywhere that the applicant was a Land Mobile Radio Manager (LMR).  It does, however, 
describe duties associated with LMR administration. To effectively challenge an EPR, it is 
important to hear from all the evaluators on the contested report--not only for support, but for 
clarificatiodexplanation. The applicant has provided no information from the evaluators on either 
of the contested reports.  In the absence of information from the evaluators, official substantiation 
of error or injustice from the Inspector General (IG) or Social Actions is appropriate, but not 
provided in this case.  It appears the contested report was accomplished in direct accordance with 
Air Force policy in effect at the time it was rendered. 

e. The applicant has failed to provide any evidence substantiating his claims in this 

case.  We strongly recommend denial of his request. 

Summary.  Based on the evidence provided, our recommendation is appropriate. 

f* 

JOYCE E. HOGAN 
Chief, BCMR and SSB Section 
Dir of Personnel Program Mgt