RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-01832
INDEX CODE: 111.05
COUNSEL: NOT INDICATED
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The AF Form 707B, Company Grade Officer Performance Report, (OPR) rendered
for the period of 8 Jun 02 through 7 Jun 03, be removed from his records.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The contested referral OPR was based on civilian charges for which he was
never convicted and that he was unfairly punished with a Letter of
Reprimand (LOR). He was punished for a driving under the influence (DUI)
charge before the case was sent to trial. He was under the impression the
referral OPR was removed from his records after the charges were dropped.
In support of his request, the applicant provides a cop of the referral OPR
and a copy of his Florida Seven year Driving Record.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 9 Jun 03, the applicant received a referral OPR closing-out on 7 Jun 03,
with an overall rating of “5”. He acknowledged receipt of the referral OPR
and did not provide a written response.
His OPR profile reflects the following:
PERIOD ENDING EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL
*7 Jun 03 5(Referral)
7 Jun 04 5
31 Oct 04 5
His OPR profile continues:
PERIOD ENDING EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL
31 Oct 05 5
25 May 07 5
* Contested report
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIDEP recommends denial, partly based on the fact the applicant was
convicted of reckless driving and has not substantiated the DUI and
trespassing charges were dropped.
He contends the referral OPR is based on a LOR that he received for a DUI
in which was not convicted. Unfortunately, the referral report does not
refer to the LOR or the DUI. It only annotates the off-base arrests for
trespassing and reckless driving. The only reference to the DUI is in the
referral letter, which can be corrected to match the OPR upon receipt of
verification the DUI charges were dropped.
The evidence the applicant provided does not show he was acquitted of the
DUI charge. It does show that on 8 Feb 03, his license was suspended for
refusing a breath test and that he was subsequently convicted on 25 Aug 03
for reckless driving on 8 Feb 03. Although, the DUI information is not
substantiated, the information used in the OPR is accurate.
The complete DPSIDEP 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 18 Jul
08, 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. After a thorough review of the
applicant’s submission and the available evidence of record, we are not
persuaded the contested report is in error or unjust. The Board notes he
has not provided sufficient evidence of a procedural error in regards to
the referral OPR. Moreover, he has not provided evidence to show the DUI
charges were in fact dismissed, or that he was not convicted of the DUI in
question. Further, the contested OPR does not refer to the LOR or the DUI.
The only reference to the DUI is in the referral letter, which may be
administratively corrected if he provides conclusive evidence the DUI
charges were dropped. Therefore, in the absence of persuasive evidence the
contested report is in error or unjust, 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2008-
01832 in Executive Session on 11 February 2009, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
Mr. Michael J. Novel, Panel Chair
Mr. Elwood C. Lewis III, Member
Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered under AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2008-01832:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 5 May 08, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memo, AFPC/DPSIDEP, dated 23 Jun 08.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Jul 08.
MICHAEL J. NOVEL
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00763
She was under investigation from on/about 20 Dec 05 to 20 Jan 06. In addition, it is the commander’s responsibility to determine promotion testing eligibility. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 May 08.
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-01027
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-01027 INDEX CODE: 111.02 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The contested OPR was a direct result of a letter of reprimand (LOR) received for actions he denied. As of this...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-00735
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-00735 INDEX CODES: 111.02, 126.03 131.09 COUNSEL: GARY R. MYERS HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Letters of Reprimand (LORs) dated 4 Oct 04, 23 Feb 05, and 18 Jul 05, be declared void and removed from her records. Her Referral Officer Performance Reports (OPRs) closing 27 Mar 05 and 15 Aug 05 be...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01556
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01556 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His officer performance report (OPR) rendered for the period from 3 Dec 06 2 Dec 07 be removed from his record. ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) and...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00919
DPSIDEP states the applicant filed an appeal through the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB) under the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-2401, Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Reports. Should the Board grant the applicants request to remove the referral report, it could direct the promotion to staff sergeant be reinstated with a date of rank and effective date of 1 December 2009. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case;...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03421
In support of his request, the applicant submits a personal statement and copies of his contested OPR, statements from his accuser, and letters of support from his rating chain. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIDEP recommends denying the applicant’s request to void his OPR closing 30 October 1997. DPSIDEP states the contested report contains accurate information that was known to the evaluators at the time the report was written.
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00850
After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicants submission, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our decision the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of proof of the existence of either an error or an injustice. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIDEP, dated 10 May 10. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 May 10.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-01591
He received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for the incident. The complete APFC/DPSIDEP evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In support of his request the applicant submitted copies of emails between him and his rater regarding the LOR and referral OPR. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice.
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC 2008 00538
In support of her appeal, the applicant provides a statement from her counsel; and, copies of her LOR, response to the LOR, Referral OPR, request to the Evaluation Review Appeals Board (ERAB) to remove the contested report, work schedules, memorandum for record, Performance Feedback, character references, ERAB decision, Promotion Recommendation, Officer Performance Reports, Education/Training Report, award and decoration documents, and articles on Nursing. The complete DPSIDEP evaluation is...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00783
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of the contested Article 15, LOR, OPR, his IG complaint, and other documents associated with the matter under review. They indicate the applicant has not provided any information of error or injustice to warrant action by the Board. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that he was not the victim of whistleblower retaliation and the evidence presented did...