RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBERS:  01-00271
		INDEX CODE 111.02  131.09
		COUNSEL:  None

		HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) closing 6 Dec 99 be upgraded from an overall rating of “4” to “5.”

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His rater mistakenly compared his performance with that of others in the same grade but different Air Force Specialty Codes (AFSC).  When the rater realized his error, he concluded that the EPR should have an overall rating of “5.”  The rater, indorser and commander all concur with this upgrade and provide supporting statements.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 11 Jan 84 and is currently serving in the grade of staff sergeant (date of rank: 1 Sep 93). Both presently and during the period in question, he was assigned to OL-D HQ AFSPC/DR, Buckley ANGB, CO, as a workgroup manager with an AFSC of 3A051.

The applicant’s last 12 performance reports have had overall ratings of “5” with the following exceptions: The contested report (“4”), the report closing 20 Apr 90 (“4”), and the report closing 13 Apr 91 (“3”).  The rater of the contested EPR also signed the preceding EPR as the indorser and gave the applicant an overall rating of “5.” A copy of this report is also provided at Exhibit B.

The applicant filed similar appeals under the provisions of AFI 36-2401 on 28 Feb 00, 24 May 00 and 17 Aug 00; however, the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB) denied his appeals on 4 Apr 00, 25 Jul 00 and 18 Oct 00, respectively.  
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, reviewed the appeal and advised that if the Board voided or upgraded the contested report, the applicant would be entitled to supplemental promotion consideration to technical sergeant beginning with cycle 00E6 and, if otherwise eligible, he would become a selectee. 

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

The Chief, Performance Evaluation Section, HQ AFPC/DPPPEP, reviewed the appeal and notes that the pertinent directive allows for the fact that it is not always possible to compare a ratee with others in the same grade and AFSC.  If evaluators do not know any other ratee serving in a particular grade and AFSC, they may rate according to their opinions and impressions of the general level of performance during that reporting period. The author also points out that the rater signed the applicant’s preceding EPR as the indorser and gave him a “5” promotion recommendation. The rater did not indicate with whom he compared the applicant’s performance during that reporting period.  The rater did not err when he initially prepared the contested report. Willingness by evaluators to upgrade a report is not a valid reason for doing so.  Denial is recommended.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant explains that the rater wants to correct the mistake of comparing him to operator personnel with a totally different job responsibility rather than with other 3A0 personnel located in the same building and in the same grade. After discovering the mistake, the following EPR was a “5,” something he should have gotten on the contested report. He deserves to be awarded an honest report, not an unfair rating. 

The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit F. 

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.	The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.	The application was timely filed.

3.	Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.  We note that each of the rating chain members of the contested EPR provided statements supporting the applicant’s request.  As we have no basis to question their assertions that the applicant’s performance for the period in question was inaccurately evaluated for the reasons indicated, we are persuaded that the report should be upgraded as requested.  Therefore, to offset any possibility of an injustice, the applicant’s records should be corrected as indicated below. 

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that the Promotion Recommendation in Section IV of the Enlisted Performance Report, AF Form 910, rendered for the period 7 December 1998 through 6 December 1999, be upgraded from a “4” to a “5.”   

It is further recommended that he be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of technical sergeant for all appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 00E6.  

If AFPC discovers any adverse factors during or subsequent to supplemental consideration that are separate and apart, and unrelated to the issues involved in this application, that would have rendered the individual ineligible for the promotion, such information will be documented and presented to the board for a final determination on the individual's qualification for the promotion.

If supplemental promotion consideration results in the selection for promotion to the higher grade, immediately after such promotion the records shall be corrected to show that he was promoted to the higher grade on the date of rank established by the supplemental promotion and that he is entitled to all pay, allowances, and benefits of such grade as of that date.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 3 May 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	            Panel Chair
	            Member
	            Member

All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 2 Jan 01, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 7 Feb 01.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPEP, dated 8 Mar 01.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 23 Mar 01.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 12 Apr 01, w/atch.

                                   
                                   Panel Chair 

AFBCMR 01-00271

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

	Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

	The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to         , be corrected to show that the Promotion Recommendation in Section IV of the Enlisted Performance Report, AF Form 910, rendered for the period 7 December 1998 through 6 December 1999, be upgraded from a “4” to a “5.”   

	It is further directed that he be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of technical sergeant for all appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 00E6.    

	If AFPC discovers any adverse factors during or subsequent to supplemental consideration that are separate and apart, and unrelated to the issues involved in this application, that would have rendered the individual ineligible for the promotion, such information will be documented and presented to the board for a final determination on the individual's qualification for the promotion.     

	If supplemental promotion consideration results in the selection for promotion to the higher grade, immediately after such promotion the records shall be corrected to show that he was promoted to the higher grade on the date of rank established by the supplemental promotion and that he is entitled to all pay, allowances, and benefits of such grade as of that date.

                                                                          
                                                                          Director
                                                                          Air Force Review Boards Agency