RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01921
		INDEX NUMBER:  111.00
	XXXXXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  None

	XXX-XX-XXXX	HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) rendered on him for the period 16 Jun 99 through 26 Oct 99 be voided and removed from his records.

He be given supplemental promotion consideration to senior master sergeant beginning with cycle 03E8.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His rater failed to write and process his EPR in a timely manner per AFI 36-2406 and failed to follow Joint Staff reviewing policy.

His rater used a letter of reprimand given to him after the closeout date of his EPR to justify marking his report down.

He was not given performance feedback in sufficient time before his EPR closeout date to make any improvements.

Although he had a marked down EPR, he still received the Joint Service Commendation Medal for his end of tour.

He does not believe that the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board, in denying his appeal, reviewed his package in total and that they ignored key comments contained in a key letter of support he provided.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of his last 5 EPRs, a letter of support from the Commander, United States European Command, a copy of his appeal to the ERAB, and other documents.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered active duty in the Air Force on 17 Dec 82.  He was promoted to the grade of master sergeant on 1 Jan 01.  A review of his last ten EPRs indicates overall ratings of “5.”  However, the EPR closing 26 Oct 99 is marked down one block in Section III, Evaluation of Performance in the factor “How well does ratee perform assigned duties?” and “How well does ratee comply with standards?”  The applicant was a nonselectee for promotion to the grade of senior master sergeant (SMSgt) during cycle 03E8.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPE recommends denial of the applicant’s request to void his EPR closing 26 Oct 99.  The applicant stated in his appeal to the ERAB that the policy on reviewing EPRs required General R____ to perform a quality check.  However, General R______ stated that he had changed offices and was no longer required to perform these checks.  The report did receive the required quality review as indicated by the signature in the front, left margin of the report.

Although the LOR the applicant received may have come after the closeout date of his EPR, his response to the LOR indicates that there had been numerous counselings that took place during the rating period and could be considered by the evaluators.  Further, a report is not considered erroneous or unjust because feedback may not have been given in a timely manner.

The only documentation provided from the rating chain is an LOR the applicant received from the rater and a feedback stating the applicant had made progress, but was still lacking in the same areas marked down on the EPR.  The applicant stated that he was not given a fair amount of time to improve his performance; however, it clearly states on the Performance Feedback that the applicant had made significant progress since July (alluding to the fact that the applicant was quite aware of the areas he needed improvement on).

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPWB provided information regarding the impact of the contested EPR on the applicant’s promotion opportunity.  If the report is voided, he will be entitled to supplemental promotion consideration beginning with cycle 03E8.  They defer to AFPC/DPPPE’s recommendation regarding removal of the EPR.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant responded to the Air Force evaluations by providing a letter of support from the indorser on his contested report.  He also offers further explanation in support of his contention that the memo he provided from the Vice Chairman was misinterpreted by the ERAB and in the Air Force evaluations.

The 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.  The Board notes that the two main points considered by the ERAB in rendering their decision to disapprove removal of the applicant’s contested EPR was (1) the letter of support he submitted was not from anyone in his rating chain and (2) he did not provide anything showing that his indorser supported removing the report.  Along with his rebuttal to the Air Force evaluations, the applicant has provided a clear, unequivocal letter of support from his indorser asking that the EPR be removed from his records.  The Board also notes that both letters of support are provided by flag officers at the highest level of military service.  Therefore, we recommend that the applicant’s records be corrected as indicated below.

_________________________________________________________________

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 (AB thru TSgt), AF Form 910, rendered for the period 16 Jun 99 through 26 Oct 99, be declared void and removed from his records.

It is further recommended that he be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of senior master sergeant (E-8) beginning with cycle 03E8.

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

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2003-01921 in Executive Session on 6 October 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 5 Jun 03, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPPE, dated 24 Jun 03.
     Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 1 Jul 03.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Jul 03.
     Exhibit F.  Memorandum, Applicant, dated 4 Aug 03,
                 w/atchs.

AFBCMR BC-2003-01921

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 XXXXXXXXX, XXX-XX-XXXX, be corrected to show that the Enlisted Performance Report (AB thru TSgt), AF Form 910, rendered for the period 16 Jun 99 through 26 Oct 99, 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 senior master sergeant (E-8) beginning with cycle 03E8.

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