RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:				DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02518
							INDEX CODE:  111.02
    							COUNSEL:  NONE

    							HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) rendered for the period of 12 October 1999 through 11 October 2000 be removed from her records.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She received an unfair rating because of the opinion of her flight commander.  His personal opinion of her was reprisal as a retribution for seeking advice from the Inspector General.  The commander coerced her rater and withheld information from the endorser (squadron commander) and rater, creating an inaccurate evaluation of her performance.  

In support of her request, applicant submits a personal statement; a copy of the contested EPR, a copy of the performance feedback worksheet, a statement from the Aerial Operations Support Flight Commander, supporting statements from the rater and additional rater, letters of appreciation for support of PHONENIX SCORPION III, a copy of AF Form 77, Supplemental Evaluation Sheet, for the period 4 June 2000 through 28 August 2000 and copies of character reference letters.   

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The Military Personnel Database (MilPDS) indicates applicant has a Total Active Federal Military Service Date of 24 April 1992.  She has continually served on active duty and has been progressively promoted to the grade of staff sergeant (E-5), effective and with a date of rank of 1 December 1999.  The MilPDS reflects an Air Force Achievement Medal for the period ending 5 December 2001 and an Air Force Commendation Medal for the period ending 1 September 2002.  

On 17 April 2002, the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB) considered and denied a similar appeal by the applicant.  The following is a resume of his EPR profile:

	PERIOD ENDING		PROMOTION RECOMMENDATION

    23 Dec 93 (A1C)				5
    23 Dec 94				5
    23 Dec 95 (SrA)				5
    23 Dec 96				5
    10 Jun 97				5
    10 Jun 98				5
    10 Jun 99				4
    11 Oct 99				5
   *11 Oct 00 (SSgt)				3
    20 Apr 01				5
    11 Dec 01				5

* Contested report - Rater’s rating downgraded from “4” by the additional rater (Squadron Commander).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPP reviewed the application and recommends denial.  DPPP states that evaluators who change their evaluations after talking with a superior have not necessarily been coerced.  In order to prove coercion, clear evidence must exist proving that the individual violated the evaluator’s rating rights.  DPPP states that both the rater and additional rater state they did not have access to an AF Form 77 for the period ending 28 August 2000 and subsequent AFAM, so their initial assessment is inaccurate.  However, the ERAB determined the AF Form 77 was available to the evaluators at the time the EPR was written.  The applicant has provided performance feedback worksheets in support of her case.  However, there is not necessarily a direct correlation between information provided during feedback sessions and the assessments on evaluation reports.  DPPP states that it is Air Force policy that an evaluation report is considered to represent the rating chain’s best judgment at the time it is rendered.  The evidence does not show the evaluators were coerced or that vital information was withheld that would have changed their assessment. 

The AFPC/DPPP evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPWB states that based on the applicant’s date of rank to staff sergeant, the first time she was considered for promotion to technical sergeant was cycle 02E6.  Should the Board void the contested report, it would serve no useful purpose to provide her with supplemental consideration for 02E6 cycle, as she could not be selected based on the fact that she missed selection by 54.04 points.   
The AFPC/DPPPWB evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 4 October 2002, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and comment.  As of this date, this office has received no response (Exhibit E). 

_________________________________________________________________

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 error or injustice.  After reviewing the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are convinced that the EPR for the period in question should be voided.  The supporting documents provided by the applicant are sufficient to cause doubt concerning the fairness and accuracy of the contested report.  In this respect, we note statements provided by the applicant’s rater and additional rater explaining the circumstances surrounding the rating on the EPR.  Both the rater and additional rater unequivocally state that if they had had access to the Letter of Evaluation and the Air Force Achievement Medal citation at the time of their evaluation, these documents would have added credence and influenced their overall rating.  In view of this and the circumstances involved, we recommend that any doubt be resolved in the applicant’s favor and conclude that the contested report should be declared void and removed from her records.  

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that the Enlisted Performance Report, AF Form 910, rendered for the period 12 October 1999 through 11 October 2000 be declared void and removed from her records.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application AFBCMR Docket Number 02-0258 in Executive Session on 19 February 2003 under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

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

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 July 2002, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPP, dated 13 September 2002.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 18 September 2002.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 October 2002.

AFBCMR 02-02518

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 xxxxxxxxxxx, be corrected to show that the Enlisted Performance Report, AF Form 910, rendered for the period 12 October 1999 through 11 October 2000 be, and hereby is, declared void and removed from her records.