RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-03596

   						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED: YES  

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) covering the period 1 Mar 12 through 28 Feb 13 be declared void and removed from her record.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The EPR was not an accurate assessment of her performance during that period.  She performed well above her grade level.

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant currently serves on active duty in the grade of Master Sergeant. 

Her most recent Enlisted Performance Report ratings were: 

Period of Supervision	Rank	Location	Rating 	
17 May 06 thru 16 May 07	SSgt	Goodfellow AFB, TX	5	
17 May 07 thru 16 May 08 	SSgt	Goodfellow AFB, TX Japan 	5	
17 May 08 thru 16 May 09	TSgt	Goodfellow AFB, TX an	5	
17 May 09 thru 28 Feb 10	TSgt	Goodfellow AFB, TX	5	
1 Mar 10 thru 28 Feb 11	TSgt	Geilenkirchen, GE 	5	
1 Mar 11 thru 29 Feb 12	TSgt	Geilenkirchen, GE	5	
1 Mar 12 thru 28 Feb 13	TSgt	Geilenkirchen, GE	4***	
1 Mar 13 thru 28 Feb 14	MSgt	Geilenkirchen, GE	5	
1 Mar 14 thru 28 Feb 15	MSgt	Spangdahlem, GE	5	
	***Report under dispute

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/DPSID recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice.  The applicant did file an appeal through the Evaluation Report Appeals Board (ERAB) under the provisions of AFI 36-2406, Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Systems, 2 Jan 2013; however, the ERAB denied the applicants request for relief.  The ERAB works under the assumption evaluation reports are accurate and objective.  Once a report is accepted for file, only strong evidence to the contrary should warrant correction or removal from an individual’s record and the burden of proof should be on the applicant.  AFI 36-2406, paragraph A2.3., states that when filing an appeal, the most effective evidence consists of statements from the actual evaluators who signed the contested evaluation: “Statements from the rating chain should cite important facts or circumstances that were unknown when the evaluators signed the report; detail the error or injustice; explain how and when it was discovered; include the correct information; relate to the contested reporting period; and, address the allegations and substantially challenge or disprove comments or ratings in the report.”  

It appears the report was accomplished in direct accordance with all applicable Air Force policies and procedures.  The applicant has provided insufficient documentation to prove her assertion the contested EPR was rendered unfairly or unjustly.  

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSID 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 12 Apr 16 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.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an injustice.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s complete submission, we believe the applicant is the victim of an error or injustice.  While we note the comments of AFPC/DPSID indicating relief should be denied because they believe the applicant failed to establish the contested EPR was rendered unfairly or constituted an injustice, we believe a preponderance of the evidence substantiates that corrective action is warranted.  In this respect, we note the applicant has provided memoranda of support for her request from both the rater and additional rater of the EPR in question in which they explain that their rating of the applicant was in error, took personal blame for the erroneous rating, and provided a rational justification as to why the erroneous rating occurred.  Therefore, based upon the testimony of her rater and additional rater on the EPR in question, the Board is convinced the EPR rating is inaccurate and unjust, and we recommend the applicant’s records be corrected as indicated below.  

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 RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show her AF Form 910, Enlisted Performance Report (AB thru TSgt), rendered for the period 1 March 2012 through 28 February 2013, be declared void and removed from her records.

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-03596 in Executive Session on 21 Jul 16 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 28 Jul 15, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSID, dated 6 Apr 16.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Apr 16.

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), it is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations, and the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.