ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-00138
INDEX CODE: 111.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
RESUME OF CASE
On 8 June 1999, the Board considered and denied applicant's 10 January
1999 application requesting that (1) the enlisted Performance Reports (EPR)
rendered for the periods 3 January 1992 through 16 November 1992, 17
November 1992 through 16 May 1993, 17 May 1993 through 16 May 1994, and 17
May 1994 through 16 May 1995 be declared void and removed from his records;
and (2) he be provided supplemental promotion consideration to the grade of
technical sergeant for each promotion from August 1993 through July 1997.
A complete copy of the Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit F.
On 2 February 2000, an additional document was submitted and his case was
reopened. (Exhibit G)
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of probable error or injustice. After reviewing the unsigned
statement from the indorser of the contested EPR closing 16 November 1992,
we are not persuaded that the applicant has been the victim of either an
error or an injustice. The statement indicates that the indorser is not
sure all procedures were followed or that the EPR was deserved. We cannot
detect any errors concerning the processing of this EPR and without more
information concerning why the report was not deserved, we find no basis
upon which to recommend voidance of the EPR closing 16 November 1992
from applicant’s records. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the
contrary, favorable action on this appeal is not recommended.
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate
the existence of probable material error or injustice; that the applicant
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 April 2000, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Oscar A. Goldfarb, Panel Chair
Mr. E. David Hoard, Acting Panel Chair
Mr. Lawrence R. Leehy, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit F. ROP, dated 14 July 1999 w/atchs.
Exhibit G. E-Mail on behalf of applicant, dated 2 February
2000, w/atch.
E. DAVID HOARD
Acting Panel Chair
The applicant filed a similar appeal under the provisions of AFI 36-2401, Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Reports, which was denied by the Evaluation Report Appeals Board (ERAB). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Promotion, Evaluation and Recognition Division, AFPC/DPPP, reviewed this application and states that when requesting an entire report be voided, the applicant must take into consideration that...
___________________________________________________________________ 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...
The report was forwarded for senior rater endorsement and signed, dated 14 June 1997. The reaccomplished EPR should be removed from his record and replaced with the initial EPR signed and dated 2 June 1997, which accurately reflected his duty performance during the period in question. EVALUATION: The Chief, Inquiries, AFBCMR Section, Enlisted Promotion & Military Testing Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, reviewed this application and states that the first time the report was considered in the...
They indicated that the first time the report was considered in the promotion process was cycle 02E7 to master sergeant (promotions effective August 2002 - July 2003). The evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the evaluations and provided a response, which is at Exhibit F. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. We...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, Enlisted Promotion & Military Testing Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, reviewed this application and states that the first time the contested report was considered in the promotion process was cycle 95E6 to technical sergeant (promotions effective August 95 - July 1996). A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Chief, Promotion, Evaluation and...
Applicant contends his supervisor rendered the contested 3 March 1994 report in reprisal against him and requests the Board remove the report from his record. While the applicant has provided a statement from his former supervisor who states that a recommendation package was submitted, we are not persuaded that his former supervisor had the authority to submit an award recommendation or that the applicant was eligible for an award at the time his supervisor went PCS. If supplemental...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-01274 INDEX CODE: 111.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Enlisted Performance Report (EPR), rendered for the period 9 January 1989 through 8 January 1990, be changed to reflect a promotion recommendation of “5.” _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT...
A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Chief, AFBCMR Appeals and SSB Section, HQ AFPC/DPPPAB, states that the previous and subsequent EPRs that applicant submits are not germane to this appeal. A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant states, in summary, that the statements he submitted all agree that the contested report was not written accurately and did not include specific...
On 20 September 1994, the AFBCMR considered and granted applicant’s requests to void the EPRs closing 30 November 1990 and 24 May 1991; reinstatement of his promotion to master sergeant, retroactive to 1 February 1991; reinstatement on active duty; and supplemental promotion consideration to the grade of senior master sergeant for all appropriate cycles, beginning with cycle 94S8. A complete copy of the Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC did not provide the applicant...
AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1997-02781
On 20 September 1994, the AFBCMR considered and granted applicant’s requests to void the EPRs closing 30 November 1990 and 24 May 1991; reinstatement of his promotion to master sergeant, retroactive to 1 February 1991; reinstatement on active duty; and supplemental promotion consideration to the grade of senior master sergeant for all appropriate cycles, beginning with cycle 94S8. A complete copy of the Record of Proceedings is attached at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC did not provide the applicant...