RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03124
INDEX CODE: 111.01
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 18 APRIL 2008
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His AF Form 475, Education/Training Report (TR), for the period 7 February
1997 through 19 December 1997 be replaced with a corrected TR.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His awards were not annotated on his TR. He contacted his squadron who has
completed a corrected TR.
In support of his request, applicant provides copies of his awards for the
period in question and a corrected TR.
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Data extracted from the Military Personnel Data System indicates the
applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of major with a
date of rank and an effective date of 1 September 2006.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPPEP recommends denial. DPPPEP advises that statements from the
evaluators during the contested period are conspicuously absent. In order
to successfully challenge the validity of an evaluation report, it is
important to hear from the evaluators not necessarily for support, but at
least for clarification/explanation. Without benefit of these statements,
DPPPEP can only conclude the TR is accurate as written. The applicant’s
unreasonable delay regarding a matter dating back nine years greatly
complicates the ability to determine the merits of the applicant’s
position. The AFPC/DPPPEP complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 22
December 2006 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no
response has been received by this office.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or
regulations.
2. The application was timely filed.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of error or injustice. We have noted the reacommplished training
report provided with the applicant’s submission. However, no supporting
documentation has been submitted from the original evaluator to
substantiate that the TR report was not an accurate assessment as rendered.
Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force
office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for
our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or
injustice. In view of the foregoing, we find no 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 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 Docket Number BC-2006-03124
in Executive Session on 23 January 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
Ms. Judith B. Oliva, Member
Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number BC-2006-
03124 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 Sep 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPEP, dated 15 Dec 06.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Dec 06.
CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02449
DPPPEP’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 9 November 2006 for review and comment within 30 days of each letter. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03291
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPEP recommends denial. DPPPEP’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant states he is currently applying to have his EPR removed in accordance with AFI 36-2401, Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Reports. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02412
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02412 INDEX CODE: COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: While there is no clear request listed by the applicant, it appears he wants his Officer Performance Report (OPR) dated 14 November 2003 to 13 November 2004, section VI, Line 8 changed to read “Powered 1st AMC mission to Iran in 23...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02740
DPPPEP concedes there were numerous changes in reporting officials; however, no procedural errors were found in the reports on file in his master personnel record and, based on the information available, DPPPEP concludes there were no gaps in his records when he met the FY77B Temporary Captains Selection Board in July 1976. Officially, the record was in compliance with the governing regulations and no gaps existed when the record met the board. Further, DPPPO can find no gaps in the...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00248
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant was appointed a first lieutenant effective 17 May 01 and was voluntarily ordered to extended active duty on that same date. Therefore, she does not have the support of the rater. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03010
AFI 36-2401 clearly states a report is not erroneous or unfair because an applicant believes it contributed to his nonselection. The complete HQ AFPC/DPPPEP evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant contends the advisory evaluation is inaccurate, misleading and mischaracterizes his request. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03157
2. Corrections be made to the Duty History section of his Officer Selection Brief (OSB). A review of the corresponding Officer Performance Reports clearly reflect the duty title data verified by DPAOM6. Notwithstanding the Air Force's argument that his correct duty title was reflected on his OPR we believe that the determination as to whether or not the error on his OSB had a negative impact on his selection status should be made by selection board members.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00222
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00222 INDEX CODE: 126.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 23 JUL 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His 16 August 2004 Training Report be removed from his records and he be reinstated into Joint Undergraduate Navigator Training (JUNT). If the applicant had been in an Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03746
Examiner’s Note: According to information provided by HQ AFPC/DPSO, the applicant actually lost three (3) days of leave at the end of FY 06. According to information provided by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, the applicant carried forward 79 days of leave at the beginning of FY 06, earned 30 days of leave during FY 06, and used 31 days of leave during FY 06. DPSO concludes the lost leave was not an error or injustice caused by the Air Force.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03031
He believes his additional rater, one who’s well-versed in writing USAF OPRs, should/would have known excluding the PME recommendation was a clear negative signal to any promotion board, as it is with Navy boards. The performance feedback date is considered an administrative error/correction. The applicant contends he was not provided official feedback and that he believes the lack of a PME recommendation was retribution for his recommendation to the BRAC process.