RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00055
INDEX CODE: 111.02
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 13 July 2008
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The duty title on his Officer Performance Report (OPR) rendered for the
period of 10 November 2004 through 9 November 2005 be changed to reflect
“OIC, ACC Regional Certificate Authority” versus “Communications &
Information Officer.”
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The duty title on his OPR closing 9 November 2005 does not accurately
reflect the responsibilities held with the position.
In support of his request, the applicant submits a copy of the contested
OPR and a proposed OPR reflecting the requested duty title.
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of first
lieutenant with a date of rank of 10 November 2006. The Military Personnel
Database (MilPDS) indicates the applicant has a Total Active Federal
Military Service Date of 11 February 2003 and a Total Active Federal
Commissioned Service Date of 10 November 2004.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPPEP recommends denying the applicant’s request. DPPPEP states that
MILPDS reflects that “Communications & Information Officer” was the
applicant’s correct duty title. The office of Officer Assignments has
confirmed that “OIC, ACC Regional Certificate Authority Workstation
Facility” is not an approved duty title for the position the applicant
held. Requests for duty title changes must be submitted to and approved by
the functional manager before they are official. The Comm-Communications
Officer Assignment Team at AFPC has no record of any request to change the
applicant’s duty title. It appears the OPR was accomplished in direct
accordance with applicable regulations. The applicant provided a
substitute report with the original evaluator signatures; however, the
willingness of evaluators to change a report is not enough. The applicant
must provide clear evidence that the original evaluation was unjust or
wrong. It is necessary to hear form all the members of the rating chain
not only for support, but also for clarification/explanation. The
applicant has failed to provide any information/support from the rating
chain on the contested OPR.
DPPPEP states an evaluation report is considered to represent the rating
chain’s best judgment at the time it is rendered. Once a report is
accepted for file, only strong evidence to the contrary warrants correction
or removal from an individual’s record. The burden of proof is on the
member. The applicant has not substantiated the contested report was not
rendered in good faith by all evaluators based on the knowledge available
at the time.
The DPPPEP evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 9
February 2007 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, this
office has received no response (Exhibit C).
_________________________________________________________________
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 an error or an 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 its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that
the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. 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 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 4 April 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
Ms. Judith B. Oliva, Member
Ms. Renee M. Collier, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR
Docket Number BC-2007-00055:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 3 Jan 07, with attachments.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPPPEP, dated 31 Jan 07.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Feb 07.
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00630
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00630 INDEX CODE: 111.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 2 SEPTEMBER 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Officer Performance Report (OPR) rendered for the period 7 January 2006 through 6 January 2007 be removed from his records and replaced with the corrected OPR. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02298
DPPPEP states that although the applicant may feel her evaluators have over stressed an isolated incident or a short period of time of substandard performance or conduct, the evaluators are obliged to consider such incidents, their significance, and the frequency with which they occurred in assessing performance and potential. As of this date, this office has received no response. CHARLENE M. BRADLEY Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2007-02298 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00890
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00890 INDEX CODE: 111.02 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 23 SEPTEMBER 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Officer Performance Report (OPR) rendered for the period 28 April 2003 through 1 February 2004 be removed from his records. The DPPPEP complete evaluation is at...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01311
DPPPEP further states the applicant has not substantiated that his rater, or the additional rater/reviewer for that matter, were influenced by others outside the rating chain, and the contested report was not rendered in good faith by all evaluators. AFPC/DPPPEP evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 20 July 2007, the applicant’s counsel reviewed the Air Force evaluation and...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00852
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00852 INDEX CODE: 111.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 12 SEPTEMBER 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The AF Form 475, Education/Training Report rendered on her for the period 18 Jun 95 through 12 Apr 96, be corrected to reflect “Distinguished Graduate...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01607
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01607 INDEX CODE: 131.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 24 JAN 09 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Officer Performance Report (OPR) rendered for the period 1 Jun 99 through 1 Jun 00, be replaced with a corrected OPR. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01709
In support of the application, the applicant submits copies of her Application for Correction/Removal of Evaluation Reports (AF Fm 948), the contested EPR, a Memo for Record, a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) and rebuttal, her child's medical records, a List of her Life Skills appointments, a Letter of Evaluation (LOE), and duty status reports. DPPPEP states the Evaluations Reports Appeals Board (ERAB) reviewed and denied the applicant's request on 24 Apr 06. While the applicant provided...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00452
In support of his request, the applicant submits copies of his EPRs; performance feedback evaluations; awards and decorations; letters of support; leave and earnings statements; temporary duty (TDY) documentation; excerpts of Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2406; Application for Correction/Removal of Evaluation Reports and correspondence concerning supplemental board consideration. DPPPEP states a report is not erroneous or unfair because the applicant believes it contributed to a...
Therefore, we recommend his corrected record be considered by Special Selection Board for the CY94A board THE BOARD RECOMM ENDS THA T: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that: a. It is further recommended that his corrected record, to include an Officer Selection Brief reflecting the first entry under Assignment History as DAFSC "5153", CMD LVL \\W/B", and Organization "Airlift Wing", be considered for promotion to...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01654
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPEP recommends denial. Once a report is accepted for file, only strong evidence to the contrary warrants removal of the report from the applicant’s record. DPPPEP’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 13 July 2007, the evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment...