Department of the Army. Pamphlet –3. Personnel Evaluation. Evaluation. Reporting. System. Headquarters. Department of the Army. provide extensive information about AR ( ) Latest articles in Army Regulations ·» AR ·» AR provide extensive information about DA PAM ( ).

Author: Tygotilar Shaktit
Country: Syria
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Medical
Published (Last): 6 July 2015
Pages: 59
PDF File Size: 5.51 Mb
ePub File Size: 7.81 Mb
ISBN: 515-8-26199-799-3
Downloads: 65361
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Bralkree

Davis was honorably discharged from active duty in the summer of and received numerous awards for her service. The Board did, however, conclude that there was “clear and convincing evidence” that Davis’ “grade at the time the OER was prepared was major” and that this called for “an administrative change to the OER. United States District Court, D.

The reggulation of the OER to personnel actions, especially those concerning selection boards, makes it necessary that this day suspense be met. We must understand and use the Officer Evaluation Reporting System to provide evaluation of performance and potential in order to provide the Army with the best leaders.

This point is of little moment, however, because the facts asserted in Davis’ affidavit and Port’s affirmation are nearly identical to those alleged throughout Davis’ administrative appeals. The “primary purpose of the Commander’s Inquiry is to provide a greater degree of command involvement in preventing obvious injustice to the rated officer and correcting errors before they become a matter of arjy record.

Log In India UK. WalkerF. In any event, this case does not involve disputed facts but hinges instead upon the legal significance of a fixed administrative record, as the fact that the parties have filed cross-motions for summary judgment suggests.

To armmy this website, you must agree to our Privacy Policyincluding cookie policy.

AR Officer Evaluation Reporting System :: Military Publications – Army Regulations – USAHEC

Davis contends that the ABCMR incorrectly denied her request to have her personnel records include a statement that any gap between OERs was not her fault. The Board observed that Davis “provided no supporting statements from either rating official[s] or any [s]enior officers in [her] chain of command who might support [her] claims.

To use this website, you must agree to our Privacy Policyincluding cookie policy. Raters evaluate an officer’s professional competence, ethics, performance and potential. Plaintiff, however, failed to file a Local Rule Click to upgrade Your Package to have this feature.

Moreover, in a memorandum dated October 29,Davis acknowledged that she had a face-to-face meeting with Lieutenant Colonel Hinds and Colonel Cupit during the summer of regarding the position of Coordinator of the 8 th Medical Brigade Symposium.

In andthe Reserve Components Selection Board considered Davis’ application for promotion to the rank of lieutenant colonel. Feedback Privacy Policy Feedback. Sec’y of the Army92 F. The amount of retirement pay and benefits that a Reserve officer ultimately receives is based upon a calculation involving the number of retirement points earned and the highest rank achieved by the officer.


It hardly seems arbitrary for regulaiton ABCMR to refuse to credit Davis for training she did not receive, even if the reason she did not receive the training may not have been her fault. As defendant points out, the affidavits submitted by Davis in support 62-105 her cross-motion for summary judgment are not part of rgeulation administrative record and therefore may not be considered when reviewing the ABCMR’s decision.

Hinds and Colonel Linda G. These provisions place responsibility on the rated officer to retulation the process of completing an OER for each regulafion. Davis describes a hardship discharge as a leave “requested by [a] soldier when there is a family emergency that interferes with military service. As defendant points out, however, courts reviewing military decisions pursuant to the APA have consistently analyzed whether an applicant has met the burden of proof the regulations impose.

For the reasons stated above, I respectfully recommend that defendant’s motion for summary judgment be granted and that plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment be denied. United States District Court, S. Apparently disregarding the ABCMR’s suggestion that she support her application with additional evidence, Davis resubmitted the paperwork she had prepared for her appeal to the ABCMR and requested the same relief.

Civilian Force Development Session: Davis further alleges that despite her “numerous” requests, she did not receive another OER from towhen she asked to be reassigned away from the rd CSH. The Board also determined that Davis failed to submit sufficient evidence to warrant 1 the placing of a statement in her file explaining that she was not responsible for the gap in her record, 2 the removal of any reference to a hardship discharge, or 3 the crediting of the twelve UTAs that she missed during her hardship discharge.

DAVIS v. HARVEY | E.D.N.Y. | Judgment | Law | CaseMine

Supreme Court ary, 09 Mar In her November evaluation, for example, Davis rdgulation a “usually exceeded requirements” rating for her performance and a “promote with contemporaries” for her promotion potential, and was rated in the second of nine blocks; in Davis’ June evaluation, her rater awarded her an “always exceeded requirements” rating for her performance and a “promote ahead of contemporaries” for her promotion potential, and her senior rater rated her in the second of nine blocks; and in Davis’ MarchDecember and March evaluations, she was awarded an “always exceeded requirements” rating for her performance and a “promote ahead of contemporaries” for her promotion potential, and her senior rater rated her in ramy first of nine blocks.

Davis earned a masters in nursing and a doctorate in nursing education from Columbia University. The Board did instruct, however, regultion “[i]f additional evidence is gathered, this would significantly increase the validity of [Davis’] appeal regularion could justify the Board’s acceptance of [Davis’] request. In addition to her work at a clinical practice, Davis has served as an instructor, an assistant professor and an associate professor at a variety of universities and medical facilities.


In her interview, Cupit stated that Davis “arrived” at the 8 th Medical Brigade in November of and not, as Davis claims, in April ofthat “it was not unusual for a soldier to report in and only to have the appropriate orders follow them months later,” and that she Cupit had “made it clear that [Davis] knew who her supervisors were and to whom she reported.

Davis’ allegations center around her movement from one Reserve unit to another unit and then back 623-015, and the “personal animus” she claims Lieutenant Colonel Hinds and her friend Colonel Cupit harbored against her.

According regultaion Davis, her professional relationship with Hinds deteriorated, and Hinds failed to delegate authority, became overwhelmed by stress, yelled, threw temper tantrums and left abusive messages on Davis’ answering machine. Assist junior officer transition into Army leadership culture.

The Hardship Discharge According to Davis, she was issued a hardship discharge effective March 24,although she had not requested one. WallaceU. Regulstion for summary judgment: Davis requested the same relief sought in her earlier applications, Def. Davis contends she was attached to the 8 th Medical Brigade for a substantially shorter period of time. Civilian Force Development Session: According to Davis, although she was informally and then officially attached to the 8 th Regulahion Brigade, she remained assigned to the rd CSH.

Davis also asserts that although she attended drills with the 8 th Medical Brigade, she did not sign in on the 8 th Medical Brigade’s pay and attendance roster as a soldier drilling with her own unit is required to do, but instead submitted a DA Formwhich is used to indicate that a soldier attended a drill outside of her own unit, to the rd CSH.

Cupit and Hinds, whose statements are part of the record, stated that Davis began working with the 8 th Medical Brigade in November or December United States District Court, W.

To provide junior officers information on the Officer Evaluation Reporting System (OERS). PURPOSE.

United StatesF. Townes has referred them to me for report and recommendation. A, although the Stipulation states that it is attached as Exhibit D.