RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-01058
INDEX CODE: 111.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her AF Form 707B, Officer Performance Report (OPR), rendered for the
period 1 Mar 05 through 28 Feb 06 be replaced with an OPR that more
accurately reflects her performance.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
After a review of her OPR, she believes the initial report did not
completely convey an accurate picture of her duty performance. Her rater
has accomplished a new OPR that includes a myriad of changes to the
original report.
In support of her appeal, the applicant provides copies of her original OPR
and the replacement copy, as well as a copy of an OPR worksheet.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant began her military career on 10 March 1995. She has been
progressively promoted to the grade of captain with a date of rank (DOR)
of 10 Apr 99. She is currently serving in the regular Air Force and has
over 14 years of service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIDEP recommends denial. DPSIDEP states evaluation reports are
considered accurate as written unless substantial evidence to the contrary
is provided. The time to provide any changes to an evaluation is before
the report becomes a matter of record. DPSIDEP forwarded the request to
the ERAB for review and consideration. The ERAB found no evidence of an
error or injustice and recommends denying her request.
DPSIDEP’s complete 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 1 May
2009 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 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2009-
01058 in Executive Session on 7 October 2009, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
The following documentary evidence with regard to AFBCMR Docket Number
BC-2009-01058 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 March 2009, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSIDEP, dated 17 April 2009.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 May 2009.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-00784
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-00784 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. The applicant submitted two appeals for his OPRs closing out 25 March 2004 through the Evaluation Reports Appeals Board (ERAB) under the provisions of AFI 36-2401, Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Reports. The complete DPSIDEP evaluation is...
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 | CY2008 | BC-2007-03453
He denies that he fraternized or engaged in an unprofessional relationship with either his spouse or the spouse of an enlisted member. The applicant did not file an appeal through the Evaluation Reports Appeals Board (ERAB) under the provisions of AFI 36-2401, Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Reports. JA has thoroughly reviewed the CDI at issue, and finds no legal deficiency to support applicant’s argument that there is insufficient evidence to substantiate the allegations against him.
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01551
DPSIDEP states the applicant did not file an appeal through the Evaluation Reports and Appeals Board (ERAB) under the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36- 2401, Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Reports; however, the ERAB reviewed the applicants request and recommended denial as they were not convinced the contested report was inaccurate or unjust. Since the EPR is not completed in accordance with Air Force Instruction 36-2406 and the applicant has failed to provide the...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01720
His Officer Performance Report (OPR) rendered for the period 2 Apr 06 through 30 May 07 be declared void and removed from his records, and a reaccomplished OPR be accepted for file in its place. Additionally, the reviewer of the contested OPR, an Air Force officer, could have intervened and had the report adjusted before it became a matter of record. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2009-01720 in Executive Session on 7 Oct 09, under the provisions of...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-01890
She also contends that her rater did not discuss the statement with her before the report became a matter of record. _______________________________________________________________ A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 11 July 2008 for review and response. _______________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of error or injustice; that...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01036
The Officer Performance Report (OPR) rendered for the period 21 Jan 05 through 20 Jan 06 be replaced with an amended report he has provided. The complete AFPC/DPSOO evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 4 Jun 10, for review and comment within 30 days. ____________________________________________________________ THE BOARD...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00762
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00762 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) rendered for the period from 8 February 2008 through 1 October 2008 be changed to reflect the correct inclusive dates, remove duplicate bullet statements, and reflect the correct dates of supervision. She...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-02422
In support of his request, the applicant provided a copy of the contested OPR, a copy of the reaccomplished report, AF IMT 709, Promotion Recommendation, and documentation associated with his Evaluation Reports Appeal board (ERAB) submission. The applicant was considered and not selected for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by the CY07B (27 November 2007), Lieutenant Colonel CSB. Unfortunately for the applicant however, a December 2007 close-out date made the report ineligible...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-02015
During the reporting period in question she received two documented formal feedbacks by two different raters. DPSIDEP further states she has not provided any statements from her evaluators and they cannot confirm whether or not, any other form of feedback or counseling was provided. AFPC/DPSIDEP’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded...