Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1997-03586A
Original file (BC-1997-03586A.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                                 ADDENDUM TO
                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  97-03586
            INDEX NUMBER:  111.01; 131.10
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Officer Performance Report (OPR) closing 19 July 1996  be  removed
from his records.  If his request is approved, he also  requests  that
he be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant  colonel  by
Special Selection  Board  (SSB)  for  the  Calendar  Year  (CY)  1997C
Lieutenant Colonel Board.

___________________________________________________________________

RESUME OF CASE:

A similar appeal was considered and denied by the AFBCMR  on  21  July
1998 (Exhibits A through E).

On 22 October 1998, the applicant  requested  reconsideration  of  the
Board’s decision and provided an additional statement from  the  rater
on the contested report (Exhibit F).

___________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

After careful consideration of the additional  statement  provided  by
the rater on the contested report,  we  are  not  convinced  that  the
report is an inaccurate assessment of the applicant’s duty performance
as rendered.  The rater stated that he lacked an understanding of  the
Air Force evaluation system.  However, we note that, even had he  been
unfamiliar with the Air Force Officer  Evaluation  System  (OES),  the
additional  rater  -  an  Air  Force  officer  who  had  indorsed  the
applicant’s  two  previous  reports  -  concurred  with  the   rater’s
assessment  of  the  applicant’s  performance  during  the  period  in
question.  In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of  persuasive
evidence that the rater  was  precluded  from  rendering  an  unbiased
assessment of the applicant’s duty  performance,  we  are  unpersuaded
that a revision of the Board’s earlier determination is warranted.

___________________________________________________________________



THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of probable  material  error  or  injustice;
that the application was denied without  a  personal  appearance;  and
that the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission  of
newly  discovered  relevant  evidence   not   considered   with   this
application.

___________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 17 December 1998, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

      Mr. David W. Mulgrew, Panel Chair
      Mr. Terry A. Yonkers, Member
      Mr. Joseph G. Diamond, Member

The following additional documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit F.  Letter from Applicant, dated 22 Oct 98, w/atch.




                                   DAVID W. MULGREW
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9703586A

    Original file (9703586A.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    If his request is approved, he also requests that he be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by Special Selection Board (SSB) for the Calendar Year (CY) 1997C Lieutenant Colonel Board. ___________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: After careful consideration of the additional statement provided by the rater on the contested report, we are not convinced that the report is an inaccurate assessment of the applicant’s duty...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9703586b

    Original file (9703586b.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board noted the supportive statement from the rater of the contested report; however, the Board did not believe it supported a finding that the contested report was in error or unjust (Exhibits A through E). _________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: A majority of the Board finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommends the application be denied. JOE G. LINEBERGER Director Air Force Review Boards Agency AFBCMR...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9800685

    Original file (9800685.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DPPP stated that the letter from the rater supports removal of the contested OPR - it does not support replacing the report with a reaccomplished version. The rater's letter does not substantiate the report, as written, is invalid. After reviewing the evidence presented, we are persuaded that the applicant may not have been fairly evaluated by the additional rater/reviewer at the time the report was rendered.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1997-03586

    Original file (BC-1997-03586.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    If the additional rater now believes the comments he made are invalid, then why didn’t he provide a statement in support of the applicant’s appeal? The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In his response, applicant restated his contentions concerning his accomplishments and the critical oversight on the part of the evaluators on the contested report. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9703586

    Original file (9703586.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    If the additional rater now believes the comments he made are invalid, then why didn’t he provide a statement in support of the applicant’s appeal? The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In his response, applicant restated his contentions concerning his accomplishments and the critical oversight on the part of the evaluators on the contested report. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9801185

    Original file (9801185.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-01185 SEP 2 9 1998 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES Applicant requests that (1) her Calendar Year 1998 (CY981 Lieutenant Colonel, Nurse Corp, Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) be replaced with a new PRF and (2) she be considered for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by Special Selection Board (SSB) for the CY98 Lieutenant Colonel Selection Board. The appropriate Air...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0102490

    Original file (0102490.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    His Officer Performance Reports (OPRs) rendered for the period 31 May 1996 to 30 May 1997, 31 May 1997 to 30 May 1998, and the Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) prepared for the Calendar Year 1998B (CY98B) lieutenant colonel selection board be corrected to reflect his correct duty title and that he receive Special Selection Board (SSB) consideration for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel for the CY98B, CY99A, CY99B, and CY00A Selection Boards. After his non-selection by the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9702709

    Original file (9702709.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 18 January 1994, the applicant received a second LOR for failure to pay a debt to the Army and Air Force Exchange Service (AAFES). In regards to the applicant stating that the contested EPRs are inconsistent with previous performance; the EPR was designed to provide a rating for a specific period of time based on the performance noted during that period, not based on previous performance. A complete copy of their evaluation is attached at Exhibit E. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0103503

    Original file (0103503.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Additionally, DPPP states that the applicant’s request for correction was for Section X, Senior Rater, to include the rank and branch of service of the senior rater and in Section IV, line 9 from, “first tour USAF Chaplain” to “second active duty tour.” DPPP recommends denial for an SSB based on the OPR not being available for the CY01A CSB. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9903165

    Original file (9903165.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: The Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, AFPC/DPPPWB, evaluated this application and provided the following information regarding the impact of the two EPRs on the applicant’s promotion consideration: The first time the two EPRs impacted the applicant’s promotion consideration was cycle 94A6 to TSgt (promotions effective Aug 93–Jul 94). We therefore recommend that the contested reports be corrected as indicated...