Q	RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBERS:  02-00864
		INDEX CODE 111.02
	 	COUNSEL:  None

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Senior Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) closing 16 Mar 01 reflect a senior rater indorsement.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The rater and additional rater were led to believe he did not qualify for a senior rater indorsement.  He provides supporting statements from the rater and additional rater of the EPR. The additional rater indicates she was under the impression the applicant didn’t warrant a senior rater indorsement because he had failed to complete Senior NCO Academy. The rater indicates this was one of the first senior NCO EPRs she had ever written and she had no idea that not having a senior rater indorsement could have a negative impact.  Both note that the applicant always earned a senior rater indorsement when eligible and request the error be corrected.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered active duty on 22 Aug 78 and is currently serving in the grade of master sergeant. During the period in question, he was the customer service chief with the 374th Comptroller Squadron at Yokota AB, Japan.  His senior NCO evaluation brief reflects that he has completed Senior NCO Academy. With the exception of the contested report, the applicant has received senior rater indorsements on his EPRs starting with the report closing 5 Nov 97.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the applicant's military records (Exhibit B) and in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force (Exhibits C and D).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPPWB notes that, in accordance with policy and regulation, a member normally will not be granted supplemental promotion consideration if the error or omission appeared on the Data Verification Record (DVR) or in the Unit Personnel Record Group (UPRG) and no appropriate corrective or follow up action was taken before the original board convened. The purpose is to reduce the number of “after the fact” changes that are initiated in an effort to get a second promotion opportunity. They confirmed with HQ AFPC/DPPPE on 21 Mar 02 that the applicant did not pursue a change to this EPR through the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB). However, he was building his case to the AFBCMR prior to 23 Jan 02, the date the promotion board convened for the 02E8 cycle, the first cycle in which the contested EPR was considered. DPPPWB believes the circumstances of this case warrant supplemental promotion consideration, if approved.

A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPPEP asserts that, regardless of the rater’s and additional rater’s intentions, the applicant has not provided a memorandum from the senior rater acknowledging a willingness to indorse this EPR. Furthermore, the applicant failed to provide a substitute EPR in the event the AFBCMR approves this appeal. Without senior rater support, approval is not recommended.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 19 Apr 02 for review and comment within 30 days.  In a letter dated 16 May 02, the applicant requested a 30-day extension. On 29 May 02, the AFBCMR Staff advised him that extensions of time were no longer possible because of Congressionally mandated timelines. The applicant was invited to temporarily withdraw his case if he needed more time, and was asked to advise the Board of his decision within 30 days. However, as of this date, this office has received no response or additional documentation from the applicant. 

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

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

2.	The application was timely filed.

3.	Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded at this time that the contested EPR should be amended to reflect a senior rater indorsement. We are persuaded that this appeal is not merely an attempt for a second promotion opportunity since the applicant was building his case before the promotion board convened for the 02E8 cycle. We also note the applicant had completed Senior NCO Academy and, except for the report in question, received senior rater indorsements on his EPRs since 5 Nov 97. The rater and additional rater support his appeal.  However, the applicant has not provided a statement from the senior rater acknowledging a willingness to indorse the contested EPR or a reaccomplished report with the senior rater’s indorsement. He requested an extension of time in order to obtain the senior rater’s indorsement and the AFBCMR Staff advised him on 29 May 02 that he could temporarily withdraw his case since extensions are no longer granted. Regrettably, the applicant neither withdrew his case temporarily nor provided documents indicating the senior rater’s support.  Therefore, at this time we have no recourse but to deny the appeal.  However, should the applicant provide a reaccomplished EPR with the senior rater’s indorsement, we would be inclined to favorably reconsider his application.  

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that 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 this application in Executive Session on 22 August 2002 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number 02-00864 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 Feb 02, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 21 Mar 02, w/atch.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPEP, dated 8 Apr 02.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Apr 02.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 16 May 02.
   Exhibit G.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 May 02.