RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01591
INDEX CODE: 111.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The Officer Performance Report (OPR) rendered for the period 3 Sep 06
through 2 Sep 07 be removed from his record.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He received the referral OPR for being arrested. All the charges were
dropped before the case went to court. The owner and employees of the
establishment submitted a letter stating that he was not involved in the
incident.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of documents
extracted from his military personnel records, a witness statement, a
letter from the State of Florida, and an extract from the Black’s Law
Dictionary.
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 major.
Applicant’s OPR profile is as follows:
PERIOD ENDING OVERALL EVALUATION
5 Aug 03 Training Report (TR)
2 Sep 05 TR
2 Sep 05 Meets Standards (MS)
12 May 06 TR
2 Sep 06 MS
*2 Sep 07 Does Not MS
2 Sep 08 MS
2 Sep 08 MS
*Referral Report
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained
in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is
attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIDEP recommends denial. DPSIDEP notes the applicant was arrested
on 11 Aug 07 for disorderly conduct and resisting arrest without violence.
He received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for the incident. His evaluators
decided to comment on the adverse action in his OPR. However, prior to the
finalizing of the report the State Attorney for Florida decided not to
pursue prosecuting the applicant and withdrew the charges in 2007.
Although the civilian authorities withdrew the case against the applicant,
this does not automatically erase the behavior of the incident. The
applicant’s commanders had the authority to question and punish his
behavior regardless of the actions taken by civilian authorities.
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.
Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________
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 an error or injustice. The applicant's complete submission
was thoroughly reviewed, to include his rebuttal response, and his
contentions were duly noted. However, we do not find the applicant’s
assertions and the documentation presented in support of his appeal
sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force
office of primary responsibility. Therefore, we agree with the
recommendation of the Air Force OPR and adopt its rationale as the basis
for our decision the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of
establishing that he has suffered either an error or an injustice.
Accordingly, the applicant’s request is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate
the existence of an error or injustice; the application was denied without
a personal appearance; and 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-2010-
01591 in Executive Session on 11 Jan 11, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 9 Apr 10, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOO, dated 23 Jun 10.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Nov 10.
Exhibit E. Electronic Mail, dated 8 Dec 10, w/atchs.
Panel Chair
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 | 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 | CY2011 | BC-2009-03522
The applicant’s argument seems to be that since the Air Force ultimately paid his claim, he did nothing to warrant an LOR or a referral OPR. First, the applicant’s commander could have found that he committed fraud when he filed his original claim with the Air Force. Exhibit H. Letter, Applicant, dated 4 Jul 10, w/atchs.
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-2007-02691
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02691 INDEX CODE: 111.02 COUNSEL: JOSEPH W. KASTL HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) rendered for the period 28 Jun 05 through 22 May 06 be declared void and removed from her records. It seems that the applicant had been accused of spousal abuse during an...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-01832
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. 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. 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.
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...
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-2007-02792
Specifically, on 16 Oct 06, he was given a profile that stated he was not world-wide deployable. AFPC/DPSIDEP indicates they have reviewed the applicant’s request for removal of the contested EPR and found no evidence the report was in error or unjust. The evidence of record indicates the applicant was given an LOR for being negligent in the performance of his duties as an NCO, which was the basis for the referral EPR.