RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00120

	 	COUNSEL:  NONE

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) rendered for the period 5 March 1998 through 4 March 1999, be removed from his records and he be provided supplemental promotion consideration for cycle 99E5.

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The contested report should not have been a referral report since there are no indicators that make the report a referral.

The applicant states that the referral memorandum indicated that one or more of the ratings on the report made it a referral; however, there are no mark downs in the far left block of any performance factors in Section III and the rater gave him a “4” in Section IV.  Furthermore, the Career Development Course (CDC) waiver was approved within the reporting period, and there are no comments that indicate a lack of professional conduct or that minimum standards were not met.

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 staff sergeant.

On 22 February 1999, the commander requested the applicant be granted a waiver of the CDC test requirement, indicating that the applicant had satisfied the intent of the CDC upgrade testing, that he was an outstanding performer, and that he had some extenuating circumstances leading to his CDC failures.  The waiver was approved on 23 February 1999.

In a letter, dated 4 March 1999, the rater referred the EPR, closing 4 March 1999 to the applicant.  The applicant provided comments to the referral report on 11 March 1999.  However, on 15 March 1999, the indorser concurred with the rater’s comments and ratings.

The applicant’s request under AFI 36-2401 to have the contested EPR removed from his records was denied by the Evaluation Report Appeals Board (ERAB), which noted that the applicant provided comments to the referral report indicating he was aware of the reason the report was being referred to him.

Applicant’s performance profile follows:

             PERIOD ENDING               OVERALL RATING

                9 Feb 94                       4
                9 Feb 95                       5
                4 Mar 96                       5
                4 Mar 97                       5
                4 Mar 98                       5
              * 4 Mar 99 Referral              4
                4 Mar 00                       5
               30 Jan 01                       5
               30 Oct 01                       5

* Contested EPR

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

AFPC/DPPPWB states, in part, that the first cycle the contested report would normally have been considered was cycle 99E5; however, since it was a referral report, the applicant was ineligible for promotion consideration. 

The AFPC/DPPPWB evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPE recommends the applicant’s request to void the report be denied; however, direct the referral memorandum be corrected in paragraph one to include the omitted words, “or comments.” AFPC/DPPPE states, in part, that Air Force policy is that an evaluation report is accurate as written when it becomes a matter of record and the applicant has not provided convincing evidence that the report is in error or unjust.

The AFPC/DPPPE evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

The applicant states that the derogatory remark made it into the contested report after the same people that wrote the report waived the CDC requirement.  His response to the CDC failures gave his chain of command the personal circumstances for his failure.  His chain of command felt that his CDC failure was not typical of his normal work ethic, but rather a case of unfortunate circumstances, and approved the waiver.  Furthermore, he was entitled to a commander’s counseling session to discuss concerns after the first CDC failure and was never given that opportunity.  In addition, the report was incorrectly filed since there were no markings to the far left as indicated in the memorandum referring the report.  

The applicant’s complete response 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 warranting voidance of the contested report and supplemental promotion consideration to the grade of staff sergeant.  After reviewing the evidence of record, we are convinced that the contested report is an inaccurate assessment of the applicant's performance during the period in question.  In this respect, we note that the applicant’s commander requested the applicant be granted a waiver of the CDC test requirement, indicating that he had satisfied the intent of the CDC upgrade testing, that he was an outstanding performer, and that he had some extenuating circumstances leading to his CDC failures.  Although the waiver was approved during the rating period, the contested report contained a comment that the applicant twice failed his CDC end-of-course examination.  In addition, the report contained a markdown in Section III, Evaluation of Performance, with respect to how well the applicant complied with individual training requirements.  In view of the above and in consideration of the applicant's prior and subsequent outstanding performance, we recommend that the contested report be declared void and removed from his records.  In addition, it is recommended that he be provided supplemental promotion consideration to the grade of staff sergeant by all appropriate cycles.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that the AF Form 910, Enlisted Performance Report, rendered for the period 5 March 1998 through 4 March 1999, be declared void and removed from his records.

It is further recommended that he be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of staff sergeant for all appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 99E5.  

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 applicant 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 Docket Number 02-00120 in Executive Session on 14 March 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 Jan 02, w/atchs.
  	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
  	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 23 Jan 02, w/atchs.
  	Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPE, dated 31 Jan 02.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Feb 02.
	Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, undated.

		 

AFBCMR 02-00120

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 APPLICANT, be corrected to show that the AF Form 910, Enlisted Performance Report, rendered for the period 5 March 1998 through 4 March 1999, be, and hereby is, declared void and removed from his records.

	It is further directed that he be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of staff sergeant for all appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 99E5.  

	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 applicant 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.