RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:			DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01190
						INDEX CODE:  111.02
  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX		COUNSEL:  NONE

  XXX-XX-XXXX				HEARING DESIRED:  NO
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) rendered for the period of 21 July 1999 through 5 July 2001 be removed from his records.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His physical, mental, and military situations prevented him from receiving a valid performance report.  

In support of his request, the applicant submits a copy of the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB) denial letter dated 11 March 2003, a copy of the contested EPR, a copy of a supporting statement from his past rater’s supervisor, and copies of medical documentation.  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The Military Personnel Database (MilPDS) indicates the applicant has a Total Active Federal Military Service Date of 21 July 1999.  He has continually served on active duty and has been progressively promoted to the grade of senior airman (E-4), effective and with a date of rank of 21 June 2002.  Based on his 16 July 2003 reenlistment for four years, he has an established Date of Separation of 15 July 2007. 

The applicant received an EPR for the period 21 July 1999 through 5 July 2001 (his initial performance report) with an overall rating of three (3).  The applicant submitted an appeal to the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB) in February 2003 requesting his EPR for the period 21 July 1999 through 5 July 2001 be removed from his records.  On 11 March 2003, the ERAB notified the applicant’s military personnel office that his appeal was reviewed and denied because the applicant did not provide any documentation that proved the report was not a fair assessment of his performance at that time.  The applicant received an EPR for the period ending 29 December 2002, in which the promotion recommendation is a five (5).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPE recommends denial.  DPPPE states that the applicant has not provided any supporting documentation contesting the validity of the ratings or the comments made in the contested EPR.  It is DPPPE’s opinion that while the applicant’s medical profiles may have prevented him from performing some of his normal duties as a security forces member, there is no evidence that his rating chain unfairly evaluated his performance due to his physical, mental and military situation.  The fact that the applicant does not agree with the report does not make the report inaccurate.  The AFPC/DPPPE evaluation is at Exhibit C.

The BCMR Medical Consultant is of the opinion that no change in the records is warranted based on medical evidence.  The BCMR Medical Consultant states that the record indicates the applicant was involved in reporting other members of his prior squadron for drug usage and was subsequently transferred to his present base under the provisions of the airmen’s protection program.  The applicant reported to the psychologist that his current squadron members had harassed him for his actions at his prior base.  The applicant was diagnosed with Occupational Problem with no specific phobia present; however, he suffered increased anxiety due to his working environment.  The psychologist’s memorandum dated 1 August 2001, noted the applicant showed some symptoms of post traumatic stress disorder concluding that the impact of the applicant’s past events were sufficiently severe enough to prevent the applicant from effectively functioning in the Security Forces career field.  The psychologist’s report indicated the applicant was worldwide qualified and would be expected to function adequately once away from the reminders of his traumatic history.  

It is the BCMR Medical Consultant’s opinion that the applicant’s documented neck and back pain were intermittent and not unusual, comparable to many other active duty members who continue to perform their duties.  The documented history of intermittent neck and back pain do not represent an extenuating circumstance that alone explains the applicant’s performance report.  The records allude to, but do not detail, work place related problems leading to the symptoms described in the mental health record entries.  In writing the performance report, the applicant’s supervisor presumably had the benefit of more detailed information regarding the work environment issues than are evident in the record. The BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 

applicant on 24 October 2003, for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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 a thorough review of the evidence of record, we are persuaded that the contested report is not an accurate reflection of the applicant’s performance during the period in question.  Circumstances in this case cause us to believe that this EPR may have been based upon personal feelings rather than an objective evaluation of the applicant’s performance.  We note that the applicant’s problems coincided with his assignment at his new duty station under the airmen’s protection program.  In our opinion, the increased anxiety he suffered in his working environment from reported co-worker harassment, probably stemming from his previous job as an informant, contributed to an unfair performance evaluation.  In view of the totality of the circumstances involved, it is conceivable that the contested report was based on personal bias and not on the applicant’s performance and potential.  In view of the foregoing, and in an effort to offset any possibility of an injustice, we recommend the EPR be declared void and removed from his records.  

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES 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 21 July 1999 through 5 July 2001 be declared void and removed from his records.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 18 December 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

All members voted to correct the records, as recommended.  The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-01190 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 Mar 03, with attachments.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPE, dated 30 Sep 03. 
	Exhibit D.  Letter, BCMR Medical Consultant, dtd 7 Aug 03. 
	Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Oct 03. 

									

AFBCMR BC-2003-01190

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 XXXXX, be corrected to show that the Enlisted Performance Report, AF Form 910, rendered for the period 21 July 1999 through 5 July 2001 be, and hereby is, declared void and removed from his records.