RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00454 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) with a closeout date of 7 May 09 be removed from her records. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The bullets written do not support the rating of a “3”. She has been a firewall “5” throughout her career prior to and after receiving this rating. She was rated unfairly against a person who did the same job, but received a “5” for his performance. She feels she was treated unfairly and discriminated against by her chain of command. Her deputy flight commander witnessed her being singled out and treated unfairly which she informed another officer that she witnessed the applicant being personally (verbally) attacked. The deputy flight commander filled out a climate assessment survey that stated what she saw “was a ridiculous amount of favoritism taking place,” but it was dismissed as not important. The officer did not care what happened to her. In support of her request, the applicant provides copies of her EPRs, copies of AF Form 77, Letter of Evaluation, e-mail communications, and copies of letters of support. Her 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 staff sergeant (E-5). The following is a resume of her EPR ratings, commencing with the report closing 7 May 10: RATING PERIOD PROMOTION RECOMMENDATION 7 May 10 5 * 7 May 09 3 7 May 08 5 7 May 07 5 RATING PERIOD PROMOTION RECOMMENDATION 1 Apr 06 5 1 Apr 05 5 1 Apr 04 5 * Contested Report _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial. DPSID states the applicant provides several supporting documents referencing incidents that took place during the inclusive period of this report. In two memorandums from the a flight commander, she states the applicant received a Letter of Admonishment (LOA) for deliberately skipping the chain of command by not waiting as instructed by her supervisor to begin physical training (PT). In the second memorandum, the flight commander had a different account of events; however, DPSID states that although the commander’s story may appear to change somewhat in the two-year interim between memorandums, the fact remains that the supervisor never stated “okay, sounds good” to the applicant, thereby excusing her of the incident. DPSID notes the applicant received a Letter of Counseling (LOC) for failing to alert her supervisor of an off-duty incident, which involved an airman under the applicant’s supervision who was arrested downtown. In another Memorandum for Record, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) for displaying negative conduct/behavior verbally towards her squadron leadership. Although the applicant may feel that her evaluators have over stressed an isolated incident or a short period of substandard performance or conduct, the evaluators are obliged to consider such incidents, their significance, and the frequency with which they occurred in assessing performance and potential. Only evaluators know how much an incident influenced the report; therefore, the opinions of individuals outside the rating chain are not relevant. With regard to the applicant’s claim that she was treated unfairly and discriminated against by her chain of command, she has not provided an Inspector General (IG) Finding, Military Equal Opportunity (MEO) complaint or Commander Directed Investigation (CDI) to substantiate her claims. The governing instructions state “Air Force members must report any form of discrimination or unfair treatment to their supervisors or commander. If you file a complaint ….” In this case, the applicant has failed to show any verified discrimination or unfair treatment. The DPSID complete evaluation is at Exhibit B. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 29 Jul 11 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, this office has received no response. _________________________________________________________________ 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 an injustice. After a thorough review of the evidence presented, we believe the applicant has established reasonable doubt as to whether or not the EPR in question is a true and accurate portrayal of her performance and demonstrated potential during the reporting period in question. We took note of AFPC/DPSID’s recommendation; however, in view of the totality of the circumstances involved and, in particular, the statements of support provided, it is conceivable that the rating on the report in question was based on possible personality conflict and not on the applicant’s performance and potential. Furthermore, in looking at the applicant’s overall record prior to and after the contested report, we have some doubt as to whether the contested report is accurate as written. Consequently, we elect to resolve any doubt in favor of the applicant. In view of the foregoing, and in an effort to offset any possibility of an injustice, we recommend the EPR be declared void and removed from her records. Therefore, we recommend that the 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 AF Form 910, Enlisted Performance Report (AB thru TSgt), rendered for the period 8 May 2008 through 7 May 2009 be declared void and removed from her records. ______________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-00454 in Executive Session on 20 Sep 11, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 Jan 11, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 22 Jul 11. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Jul 11. Panel Chair