RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01811
		INDEX CODE:  111.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) rendered for the period 6 October 1999 through 5 October 2000 be declared void and removed from his records and he be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of master sergeant for cycle 02E7.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The contested report is unjust because it contains so many inconsistencies.  He has proven that written feedback never occurred even though the record initially stated that it was.  There is no documentation to support any significant change in his performance or behavior from his previous evaluations, which would have caused there to be a change in his rating for the rating period in question.  In fact, the change in rating has been shown to have been influenced by others outside of the rating chain which caused the report to be changed from a “5” as originally written.  Personal bias dictated this rating, not performance.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a personal statement, memoranda for record from the NCOIC, Pharmacy Flight and the Squadron Section Commander, a statement from the former section commander, a copy of the AF Form 948, Application for Correction/Removal of Evaluation Reports, and copies of his last eight EPRs prior to the contested report.  Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air Force in the grade of technical sergeant.

The following is a resume of his Enlisted Performance Reports since 1994.

      PERIOD ENDING                 PROMOTION RECOMMENDATION

          5 Oct 94				    5
          5 Oct 96				    5
          5 Oct 97				    5
          5 Oct 98				    5
          5 Oct 99				    5
         *5 Oct 00				    4
          5 Oct 01				    5
          5 Oct 02				    5

      *Contested Report

The applicant filed an appeal under the provisions of AFI 36-2401, Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Reports, 1 December 1997.  The Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB) denied his request.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPE states that the applicant failed to substantiate that the lack of a one time formal feedback prevented the evaluators from preparing a just and accurate report.  The memos provided by the applicant clearly show he was lacking in his performance during this time period and was rated accordingly.  The applicant had been working for the same supervisor for several years and they found it improbably that if the applicant was lacking in his performance that the rating chain did not make him aware of it.  As far as the contention of coercion, the applicant did not provide any evidence that proved or indicated any coercion took place.  In fact, the rater indicates she still stands by the “4” rating.  Air Force policy is that an evaluation report is accurate as written when it becomes a matter of record.  There are no errors or injustices cited in the EPR.  Therefore, they recommend denial of applicant’s request (see Exhibit C).

AFPC/DPPPWB states that the first time the contested report was used in the promotion process was cycle 01E7.  The applicant’s total promotion score was 300.51, and the score required for selection in his AFSC was 324.93.  If the EPR is removed, his total score would not increase sufficiently to make him a select for promotion for cycle 01E7.  However, his total promotion score for cycle 02E7 was 325.32, and the score required for selection in his AFSC 326.05.  Should the Board decide to void the report as requested, providing he is otherwise eligible, the applicant will be entitled to supplemental consideration for cycle 02E7.  He would become a select pending favorable data verification and the recommendation of his commander.  As a matter of information, the applicant was a select for cycle 03E7 (promotions effective Aug 03 - Jul 04).  A complete copy of their evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant states that he has shown there were a number of inconsistencies with this evaluation.  He has proven that the integrity of the report is in question.  In reference to the summary paragraph stating that it was not the lack of one time feedback that prevented the evaluators from preparing a just and accurate report, but the fact that no formal feedback was ever given during this rating period, he indicates that (he) the ratee had no opportunity to improve if no administrative actions or formal feedback was ever given to indicate a need for improvement.  He has shown that the intentions of the rater were to give him a “5.”  As for the report being accurate, he resubmitted the memos from the section commander, who was the indorser of the contested report, stating that after reviewing all documents and discussing this case with the ratee’s direct supervisors, he feels that this EPR should be pulled or elevated to a “5.”

Applicant's complete response, with attachments, 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 error or injustice warranting voidance of the contested report.  After reviewing the evidence of record, the Board is convinced that the contested report is not an accurate assessment of applicant's performance during the period in question.  Based on the statement submitted from the staff pharmacist, it appears that there was undue command influence because of a personal conflict that existed between the applicant and the then pharmacy flight commander.  The statement also reveals that the possibility exists that the rater was unable to render an honest assessment of applicant's performance due to the conflict.  In view of the above, the Board recommends that the contested report be declared void and removed from his records.  In addition, we recommend he be provided supplemental promotion consideration for all appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 02E7.

_________________________________________________________________

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 6 October 1999 through 5 October 2000, be declared void and removed from his records.

It is further recommended that applicant be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of master sergeant for all appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 02E7.

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 applicant was promoted to the higher grade on the date of rank established by the supplemental promotion and that applicant is entitled to all pay, allowances, and benefits of such grade as of that date. 

__________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application, BC-2003-01811, in Executive Session on 25 September 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 23 May 03, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPE, dated 25 Jun 03.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 1 Jul 03.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Jul 03.
   Exhibit F.  Applicant's Response, dated 8 Aug 03, w/atchs.

                                   Panel Chair

AFBCMR BC-2003-01811
INDEX CODE:  111.00

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, be corrected to show that the Enlisted Performance Report, AF Form 910, rendered for the period 6 October 1999 through 5 October 2000, 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 master sergeant for all appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 02E7.

	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 applicant was promoted to the higher grade on the date of rank established by the supplemental promotion and that applicant is entitled to all pay, allowances, and benefits of such grade as of that date. 

		Director
		Air Force Review Boards Agency