RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:		DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-02672
				INDEX CODE:  111.02
				COUNSEL:  NONE
				HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) rendered for the period 7 May 06 through 20 Nov 06 be removed from her records.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was not counseled on her shortcomings and she did not receive midterm feedback.  The negative comments on the report are vague and unfounded.

In support of her application, she provided a copy of her Joint Service Achievement Medal, copies of her EPRs, and a virtual MPF printout.

Her complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of senior airman.

On 31 Jan 07, the applicant received a referral EPR for the period ending 20 Nov 06.  She filed an appeal under the provisions of AFI 36-2401, Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Reports.  The Evaluation Reports Appeals Board (ERAB) denied her appeal because they were not convinced the report was inaccurate as written.

The applicant’s performance report profile as a SrA reflects the following:

			PERIOD ENDING 			OVERALL EVALUATION

			      5 Jul 04					5
			      6 May 05					5
			      6 May 06					5
			    *20 Nov 06					4

* Contested Report

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIDEP recommends the requested relief be denied.  DPSIDEP states although the governing Air Force Instruction requires documented feedback sessions, they do not replace informal day-to-day feedback.  A rater’s failure to conduct a required or requested feedback session, or document the session on a Performance Feedback Worksheet, will not in itself, invalidate any subsequent performance reports.  The applicant has not provided any evidence to support her contention of not receiving feedback or being counseled on her shortcomings.  It is the ratee’s responsibility to notify the rater, the rater’s rater, when required or requested feedback did not take place.  She has not shown what attempts she made to ensure the feedback was accomplished.  The memorandum she provides from the Area Defense Counsel (ADC) addresses issues they felt were inaccurate; however, DPSIDEP reviewed the report and determined the ADC was inaccurate in the memorandum.  DPSIDEP adds that an evaluation report is considered to represent the rating chain’s best judgment at the time it was rendered.  Once a report is accepted for file, only strong evidence to the contrary warrants removal of the report from the record.   

The complete AFPC/DPSIDEP evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 30 Nov 07, for review and response within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.  

_________________________________________________________________

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 an error or an injustice.  After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, we are not persuaded that relief should be granted.  Applicant's contentions are duly noted; however, we do not find these assertions, in and by themselves, sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force office of primary responsibility.  Therefore, we adopt the rationale expressed as basis for our conclusion that she has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2007-02672 in Executive Session on 13 Feb 08, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 14 Aug 07 w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Letter, AFPC/DPSIDEP, dated 25 Oct 07.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Nov 07.