RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS.


IN THE MATTER OF: 		DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-01598

				COUNSEL:  NONE

				HEARING DESIRED:  YES 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her AF Form 910, Enlisted Performance Report (MSgt thru CMSgt), 
for the period of 12 Apr 10 thru 29 Feb 12 be removed from her 
official military personnel record.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The direct impact of the procedural process taken has brought 
adverse repercussions to the continuation of her Air Force 
career.  As seen in the attached documents, this severe action 
was not warranted and was a clear over reach that seemed to be 
vindictive in nature.   After reaching out to AFLOA/ADC, they 
provided a letter supporting the fact she followed proper 
procedures as well as the Inspector General stating improper 
procedures occurred and she had no wrong doing.  

Her EPR which closed out February 2012 was not reviewed and 
processed by AFPC as required.  The report was pre-marked in 
Section XII, Ratee’s Acknowledgement, without her authorization, 
in which she annotated “NO” with her initials (JEA) and comments 
stating not all required feedbacks were accomplished.  
Additionally, her corrections and comments were submitted but 
never updated nor attached in the final record as required for 
the appeal of the EPR.  If the EPR has been routed through the 
appropriate channels, it would have been sent back for proper 
coordination and corrections.  Instead her EPR was routed 
directly for updated into MilPDS without review.

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving in the Air Force Reserves in 
the grade of Senior Master Sergeant. 

The applicant’s AF Form 911 for the period of 12 Apr 10 thru 29 
Feb 12 was referred to the ratee based on negative comments in 
Section III, Performance Assessment.    

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:

AFRC/A1K recommends denial as the applicant has not exhausted 
all reasonable administrative remedies prior to submitting the 
application.  

While the applicant filed a complaint with Wing Inspector 
General Office and their Congressman, both were closed out 
without a finding in favor of the member’s request to remove the 
referral EPR from the member’s record.

After careful review of the source documents provided by the 
applicant, per AFI 36-2406, Officer and Enlisted Evaluation 
Systems, paragraph 10.1.1., “The Evaluation Reports Appeal Board 
(ERAB) was established to provide all Air Force personnel with 
an avenue of relief for correcting errors or injustices in 
evaluations at the lowest possible level,” there was no attempt 
made by the member to resolve this issue at the lowest level, in 
this case, the ERAB.  

A complete copy of the AFRC/A1K 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 7 Jul 15 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 not 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 basis to recommend granting the 
relief sought in this application.

4.  The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not 
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel 
will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.  
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably 
considered. 


THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that all available avenues of 
administrative relief have not been exhausted; and the 
application will only be reconsidered upon submission of 
documentary evidence indicating that said avenues of 
administrative relief have been exhausted.  


The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2015-01598 in Executive Session on 17 Nov 15 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2015-01598 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 May 15, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFRC/A1K, dated 19 Jun 15.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Jul 15.