RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01134 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) for the period of 1 Jan 13 through 31 Dec 13 be removed from his permanent record. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His 31 Dec 13 close-out evaluation is invalid based on the report only having a single evaluator who did not meet the grade requirement in accordance with AFI 26-2406, Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Systems, paragraph 1.4.11.5.3.1 which states: an evaluator must be an O-6 or a GS-15, YC-03 (or equivalent) and designated as a Senior Rater (SR) appointed by the Management Level to close out an evaluation as a single evaluator. If the rater is a SR, the evaluation must close out at this level unless it is a referral evaluation. The Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB) has substantiated that an error or injustice occurred but will not remove the EPR without a new report being accomplished. Such a requirement is irrelevant to the fact that the invalid report is still in his records and should be removed immediately, regardless if another report is accomplished. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of Senior Master Sergeant (E-8). The contested report, rendered for the period closing on 31 Dec 13, reflects an overall assessment of above average and is endorsed by a single evaluator in the grade of lieutenant colonel (O-5). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIDE recommends denial indicating the applicant has not exhausted all available avenues of administrative relief prior to seeking correction of his military record. The Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) will not consider a case until all avenues of administrative relief have been exhausted. The application was forwarded to the Evaluation Report Appeals Board (ERAB) for their review and they determined to deny the request without action, pending additional supporting documentation. If the applicant wishes to void the contested report, the applicant must resubmit a new request to the Evaluation Report Appeals Board (ERAB) via vMPF. The applicant was previously informed by the ERAB that the Force Support Squadron (FSS) would be required to reaccomplish the contested report based on the noted violation of AFI 36-2406, Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Systems, requiring an evaluator to be an O-6 or a GS-15, YC-03 (or equivalent) and designated as a Senior Rater (SR) appointed by the Management Level to close out an evaluation as a single evaluator. The applicant’s Force Support Squadron (FSS) did reaccomplish the report, however, the replacement report is also erroneous in that it reflects an incorrect close-out date of 14 Nov 13, when the contested report has a closeout date of 31 Dec 13. The applicant has been advised he needs to file a new ERAB request to have this issue resolved as both reports are invalid and cannot be filed into the official record. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIDE 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 28 Jul 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). 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 error or injustice. In this respect, we note this Board is the highest administrative level of appeal within the Air Force. As such, an applicant must first exhaust all available avenues of administrative relief provided by existing law or regulations prior to seeking relief before this Board, as required by the governing Air Force Instruction. The Air Force office of primary responsibility has reviewed this application and indicated there is an available avenue of administrative relief the applicant has not first pursued. In view of this, we find this application is not ripe for adjudication at this level, as there exists a subordinate level of appeal that has not first been depleted. Therefore, in view of the above, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-01134 in Executive Session on 19 Feb 15, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 13 Mar 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIDE, dated 1 Jul 14. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Jul 14.