RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01311
		INDEX CODE:  111.01

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Education Training Report (AF Form 475), rendered for the period 6 April 2000 through 15 December 2000, be corrected by removing the statement in Section III, Other Comments, “CPT Friedman needs to work on NCO/officer relationships.”
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The comment is not a fair or truthful characterization of his ability to work with NCOs.  During his entire training period, he was never given any negative written or verbal feedback.

In support of his request, applicant submits a personal statement and letters of support from former classmates and an NCO co‑worker.  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant’s Total Active Federal Military Service Date (TAFMSD) is 1 June 1995.  He is currently serving on active duty in the grade of captain, with an effective date and date of rank of 31 May 1999.  Applicant's OPR profile, commencing with the report closing 31 May 96, follows:

		Period Ending	Evaluation

		  31 May 96	Meets Standards (MS) - 2LT
		  31 May 97	     MS - 1LT
		  31 May 98	     MS
		  31 May 99	     MS - CAPT
		   5 Apr 00	Education/Training Report (TR)
		* 15 Dec 00	     TR
		  18 Jun 02	     TR

*  Contested Education/Training Report (TR)
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPPE recommends the application be denied.  DPPPE states that the unsigned memos of support state that they have seen the applicant interact with NCOs and never once exhibit unprofessional behavior.  However, the rater on the Training Report (TR) felt the applicant did not interact with NCOs well and felt strongly enough on the issue to mention it on the report.  In accordance with Air Force policy, an evaluation report is accurate as written when it becomes a matter of record.  The applicant did not provide any documentation (signed or unsigned) that proved the statement on the report was not accurate.  The HQ AFPC/DPPPE evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 4 June 2003 for review and response.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D).
_________________________________________________________________

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 applicant’s submission, including the statements of support, we are unpersuaded that the contested report should be altered.  No evidence has been presented showing that the evaluator was unable to render a fair assessment of the applicant’s behavior at that point in time.  We have reviewed the statements of support and do not find these unsigned statements provide an adequate basis to recommend approval of the requested relief.  Although both the applicant and the class leader were counseled concerning the NCO incident, we note that the evaluator only commented on the applicant’s need for improving NCO/officer relationships.  Absent is a statement from the evaluator explaining why he felt it was important for this comment to be on the applicant’s TR.  Additionally, we found no evidence that the contested report was prepared contrary to the governing instruction.  In view of the foregoing, we believe the contested TR should stand as written.  Therefore, applicant’s request to have the contested report amended is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________

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 31 July 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-01311.

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 18 Mar 03, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPE, dated 2 Jun 03.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Jun 03.