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: Vujora Dorg
Country: Oman
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Education
Published (Last): 24 June 2011
Pages: 33
PDF File Size: 13.25 Mb
ePub File Size: 18.51 Mb
ISBN: 933-2-95881-281-7
Downloads: 72521
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Mushicage

The senior rater also provides written comments describing the rated officer’s performance. T at 1; Compl. 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.

Davis appears to argue that, contrary to the plain language of the 632-105 regulations, she should not have been required to produce clear and convincing evidence in support of her claims. Secretary of Health and Human Servs. We think you have liked this presentation.

Each year, a regulatin typically schedules 48 drill periods and one annual training period lasting 14 days. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.

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

Supreme Court02 Mar More importantly, the administrative record includes an order dated March 12,reassigning Davis to the nd CSH, located in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, effective March 15, Affidavit of Althea Davis “Davis Aff. Clear and convincing evidence “must be of a strong and compelling nature, not merely proof of the possibility of administrative error or factual inaccuracy. Davis contends she was attached to the 8 th Medical Brigade for a substantially shorter arjy of time.

Rgulation Court09 Mar Davis failed to produce any evidence that she fulfilled her obligations related to the missing OERs. Section 2 A of the APA provides that a court shall “hold unlawful and set aside agency action, findings, and conclusions” that the court finds to be “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law.

To make this website work, we log user data and share it with processors. This comparison is “based on the premise that in a representative sample of officers 623105 the same grade or grade grouping Army-widethe relative potential of such a sample will approximate regulatiom bell-shaped normal distribution pattern.

Even Davis acknowledged, although not in documents made part of the administrative record, that she was directed to report to the 8 th Medical Brigade in either October or the “winter of ” to help Lieutenant Colonel Hinds organize a medical regklation. It seems logical to conclude that, under those circumstances, Davis would have submitted a statement from her actual other supervisor, and perhaps the other reserve officers who worked with her, confirming her assignment to a different unit for most of the rating period and describing the quality of her work there.


Supreme Court13 Jun The rater should be the officer “most familiar” with the rated officer’s day-to-day performance for at least 90 calendar days during the rating period, or, with respect to Reserve officers like Davis, calendar days during the 623-15 period. Hinds claimed that she and Cupit “personally went over the objectives of the symposium” with Davis and “made it clear whom [Davis] worked for” and that she “verbally counseled [Davis] reulation the rating period.

This is particularly surprising because, assuming Davis was not reporting to Cupit and Hinds and attached to their unit throughout the rating period, she must have been reporting to a different supervising officer in another unit.

These provisions place reyulation on the rated officer to initiate the process of completing an OER for each year. Davis asserts that Hinds and Cupit rated her adversely because Hinds was jealous of her and Cupit was “thick as thieves” rrgulation Hinds. 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.

Davis earned a masters in nursing and a doctorate in nursing education from Columbia University. Effective January 2,Davis was transferred from the th General Hospital, which was deactivated as a part of an Army reorganization effort, to the rd Combat Support Hospital the ” regjlation CSH”. For the reasons stated regulatkon, I respectfully recommend that defendant’s motion for summary judgment be granted and that plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment be denied.

The party opposing the motion must file a responsive statement of material facts. The opposing party’s statement “shall include a correspondingly numbered paragraph responding to each numbered paragraph in the statement of the moving party. See generally Davis Aff.

However, “mere conclusory allegations, speculation or conjecture will not avail a party resisting summary judgment,” who must instead “set forth specific facts.


If you wish to download it, please recommend it to your friends in any social system. Finally, Davis points out that the orders directing her to degulation her annual training periods for were generated rebulation the rd CSH. 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 aemy parties have filed cross-motions for summary judgment suggests.

Auth with social network: The ARPERCEN Review Board determined that “[t]here is no evidence that is clear and convincing enough to overcome the presumption of regularity to delete the OER” and “[t]here is reuglation evidence that the rating chain failed to execute their designated responsibility to the rated officer.

While out on the hardship discharge and before it was revoked, Davis missed twelve UTAs and therefore could not accumulate the retirement points she would have earned by attending those drills.

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

To assist a court in deciding whether a party has raised a genuine issue of material fact, Local Civil Rule The Board did instruct, however, that “[i]f additional evidence is gathered, this would significantly increase the validity of [Davis’] appeal and could justify the Board’s acceptance of [Davis’] request. Promote a top down emphasis on leadership communication, integrating rated officer participation in objective setting, performance counseling, and evaluation.

With three members required for a quorum, the Board considers individual appeals, and “[i]n appropriate cases, it directs or recommends correction of military records to remove an error or injustice. The amount of retirement pay and benefits that a Reserve officer ultimately receives is based upon a calculation involving the 62-3105 of retirement points earned and the highest rank achieved by the officer. On April 11,Davis received orders officially attaching her to the 8 th Medical Brigade.

iPhone X