RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-03399
		INDEX CODE:  111.02

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) closing 8 Sep 06 be voided and removed from his record.  

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His EPR, closing 8 Sep 06, was downgraded by his commander because he was medically disqualified for the 1A3X1 Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) even though his EPR was for workgroup manager (WGM) duties under AFSC 9A000 (awaiting retraining).  He was nondeployable because of his condition.  

He did not receive a required feedback during the rating period as required by Air Force Instruction (AFI).  While he understands this alone does not invalidate an EPR, he never received any negative feedback during the rating period and fully expected to receive a “5” rating.  In his previous EPR, he received a letter of counseling (LOC), a letter of admonishment (LOA), a letter of reprimand (LOR), and an Article 15 and still received a “4” rating.  

In support of his appeal, applicant submits a personal statement; copies of the EPRs closing 25 Nov 05 and the contested report 8 Sep 06, and email correspondence.

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

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant is currently serving as a staff sergeant with a Duty Title as Assistant Workgroup Manager.  

A resume of applicant’s EPR profile follows:

	      PERIOD CLOSING			OVERALL EVALUATION

			22 Mar 05							4
			25 Nov 05							4
*			08 Sep 06							3
			08 Sep 07							5

* - The contested report rendered for the period 26 Nov 05 – 8 Sep 06 reflects 224 days of supervision and Performance Feedback as accomplished on 14 Jul 06.  

Applicant filed an appeal under the provisions of AFI 36-2401, Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Reports.  The Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB) denied the requested relief.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPSID reviewed this application and recommends denial.  

In accordance with AFI 36-2401, paragraph A1.5.8., only members in the rating chain can confirm if counseling and/or feedback was actually provided; whether formal or informal; whether verbal or in writing.  While current Air Force policy requires a formal feedback documented on the AF Form 931, Performance Feedback Worksheet (PFW), a direct correlation between information provided during the feedback sessions, and the assessment on evaluation reports does not necessarily exist.  Additionally, a formal feedback does not negate any day-to-day interaction that may include any type of formal feedback/counseling, whether verbal or in writing.  There may be occasions when feedback was not provided during a reporting period; unfortunately for the applicant however, the lack of counseling or feedback, by itself, is not sufficient justification to challenge the accuracy or justness of a report.  Evaluators must confirm they did not provide counseling or feedback, and that it directly resulted in an unfair evaluation.  

Additionally, an evaluation report is considered to represent the rating chain’s best judgment at the time it is rendered.  Once a report is accepted for file, only strong evidence to the contrary warrants correction or removal from an individual’s record.  The burden of proof is on the applicant and he has not substantiated the contested report was not rendered in good faith by all evaluators based on knowledge available at the time.

HQ AFPC/DPPPEP’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Upon receiving the denial of his request to the ERAB, he attempted to contact his rater, rater’s rater, and commander of his unit that issued the report.  His rater informed him that his rater’s rater made him change the rating and that he did not believe he deserved the “3” rating.  His rating chain should have nonconcurred with the rater’s rating rather than forcing him to change his rating.

In support of his appeal, he provides a personal statement and email correspondence.

Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E.  

___________________________________________________________________

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.  We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case, including the emails from his commander and his rater.  The applicant filed an appeal with the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB); however, the ERAB was not convinced the contested report was in error and denied relief.  While the commander was justified and within his discretionary authority to determine the rating he believed the applicant should receive, a majority of the Board believes there may have been mitigating circumstances surrounding the rating from his supervisor.  In this respect, based on the evidence presented, a majority of the Board finds that although not conclusive, it appears the applicant’s rater may have been coerced into changing his rating by the commander and first sergeant.  The governing directive, AFI 36-2406, Officer and Enlisted Evaluation System, Chapter 3.2, states that it is the additional rater’s responsibility to complete Section VI by concurring or noncurring with the rater and making comments.  Therefore, a majority of the Board believes that any doubt should be resolved in the applicant’s favor and recommends the EPR closing 8 September 2006 be voided and removed from his record.  

___________________________________________________________________

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 IMT 910, rendered for the period 26 November 2005 through 8 September 2006, be, and hereby is, declared void and removed from his records.

___________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2008-03399 in Executive Session on 8 January 2009, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

XXXXXXXXXX, Panel Chair
XXXXXXXXXX, Member
XXXXXXXXXX, Member

By a majority, the members voted to correct the records, as recommended.  XXXXXXXXXX voted to deny the applicant’s request and did not want to submit a minority report.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Sep 08, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSID, dated 22 Sep 08.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Oct 08.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, undated, w/atch.

AFBCMR BC-2008-03399

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 APPLICANT, be corrected to show that the Enlisted Performance Report (AB thru TSgt), AF IMT 910, rendered for the period 26 November 2005 through 8 September 2006, be, and hereby is, declared void and removed from his records.