RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-00121
INDEX CODE: 111.01
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Officer Performance Report (OPR) rendered for the period of 18 Dec 95
through 17 Dec 96, be removed from his records.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The OPR makes reference to a civilian conviction that does not exist. On 8
Jan 98, all charges were dismissed and he was released from all penalties
resulting from said offense. He has the full support of his rater and
additional rater in this matter.
In support of his request applicant provided a copy of his 17 Dec 96 OPR;
Grand Forks County District Court orders; his criminal record check;
statements from his rater and additional rater; and, his Evaluation Reports
Appeal Board (ERAB) decision. His complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Information extracted from the personnel data system reveals that applicant
was appointed a second lieutenant, Reserve of the Air Force on 14 Jun 92
and was voluntarily ordered to extended active duty (EAD) on 8 Dec 92. He
was progressively promoted to the grade of captain, having assumed that
grade with a date of rank of 14 Jun 96.
The following is a resume of his recent OPR profile.
PERIOD ENDING OVERALL EVALUATION
21 Apr 00 Training Report
31 Jul 99 Training Report
12 Jul 99 Meets Standards
17 Dec 98 Meets Standards
23 Apr 98 Training Report
17 Dec 97 Meets Standards
*17 Dec 96 Does Not Meet Standards
* - Contested report.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Chief, Evaluation Programs Branch, AFPC/DPPPEP, reviewed applicant’s
request and recommends denial. DPPPEP states that applicant twice engaged
in inappropriate conduct which was properly documented on his OPR. His
rating chain has been misled to believe that he was not convicted of the
charges at all. He was initially convicted (after his plea of guilty);
however, only after completion of the terms of the probation was the
conviction later dismissed. Although the Grand Forks County District Court
dismissed the charges against him, when the rater signed and referred the
OPR on 2 Jan 96, the statement on the OPR was a true and accurate statement
(see Exhibit C).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 20 Apr
00 for review and response within 30 days. As of this date, this office
has received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or
regulations.
2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of
justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of probable error or injustice. We took notice of the
applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however,
we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of
primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our
conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or
injustice. Evidence has not been presented which would lead us to believe
that the contested report is not a true and accurate assessment of the
applicant's behavior during the specified time period. Therefore, in the
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to
recommend granting the relief sought in this application.
________________________________________________________________
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 14 Jun 01, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Henry Romo, Jr., Panel Chair
Mr. Albert F. Lowas, Jr., Member
Mr. John E. Pettit, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 7 Jan 01, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPEP, dated 9 Mar 01.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 20 Apr 01.
HENRY ROMO, JR.
Panel Chair
Applicant alleges that PME statements were not included in the contested report and he was not awarded a medal because of reprisal against him. He was awarded the Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) for service performed at the Air Force Academy during the period 26 June 1993 to 7 October 1996. He was awarded the Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) for service performed at the Air Force Academy during the period 26 June 1993 to 7 October 1996.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02350 INDEX CODE: 111.02 APPLICANTS COUNSEL: None SSN HEARING DESIRED: None _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Airman Performance Reports (APRs)/Enlisted Performance Reports (EPRs) for the periods closing 17 Feb 82, 11 Jan 90, 15 Dec 90, 27 Apr 91, and 27 Apr 92 be declared void. The applicant also alleges she received a...
In support of his request, applicant submits a personal statement, a copy of the contested OPR and reaccomplished OPR, a copy of the contested PRF and revised PRF, statements of support from his rating chain and Management Level Review (MLR) President, the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB) decision and additional documents associated with the issues cited in his contentions (Exhibit A). _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02209 INDEX CODES: 111.02, 131.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) prepared for consideration by the Calendar Year 1997E (CY97E) Lieutenant Colonel Board (PO597E), which convened on 8 Dec 97, be voided and replaced with a reaccomplished PRF. There was...
A complete copy of the DPPPA evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on 25 Jan 99 for review and response. In view of the foregoing, and to remove the possibility of an injustice, recommend that the applicant’s records be corrected to reflect award of the MSM. _________________________________________________________________ THE...
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The 16th Operations Support Squadron (OSS) completed a 161-day OPR reflecting his current duty, Operations Officer, early in order to be signed and faxed to the promotion board in time for inclusion in his records. The Editor also states that the rater did have full intent for the contested report to meet the board. HENRY ROMO, JR. Panel Chair AFBCMR 00-01203 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: 01-00271 INDEX CODE 111.02 131.09 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) closing 6 Dec 99 be upgraded from an overall rating of “4” to “5.” _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His rater mistakenly compared his...
However, he has not received the report and the DOD IG has not provided a date when the report will be released. He is requesting that this medal be included for SSB consideration because of the actions of the USAF Academy and the resulting assignment to the SWC. Regarding the applicant’s request that the SWC/AE medal (Air Force Commendation Medal) be included in his records for consideration by the CY98B Lieutenant Colonel Board, it appears that the medal was awarded subsequent to the...
Although the citation was not present in applicant’s OSR for the board’s review, the selection board had his entire officer selection record (including the OSB reflecting the DMSM, 1OLC) at their disposal during promotion consideration. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 1 Jun 01 for...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1996-03600
In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a detailed personal statement and other documents associated with the matter under review, including top promote materials, board member observations, and documentary evidence pertaining to illegal selection boards. Applicant's complete response and additional documentary evidence are at Exhibit G. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Pursuant to the Board's request, the Evaluation...