RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04760 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Enlisted Performance Report (EPR), rendered for the period 22 Jun 10 through 18 Nov 10, be removed from his records and replaced with an existing Letter of Evaluation (LOE) for the same period. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He should have received a change of reporting official (CRO) EPR due to his permanent change of station (PCS) to Patrick AFB in Nov 10. When he submitted a PCS request for Little Rock AFB, he notified the military personnel flight (MPF) that he had not received the CRO EPR for the period in question. In Jun 12 an AF Form 77, Letter of Evaluation was placed in his records in place of the CRO EPR because eighteen months had passed since the close- out of the report. The CRO EPR was submitted in Jun 12, but was not considered valid in that the AF Form 77 was already a permanent part of his record. The EPR was resubmitted in Nov 12 and finally placed in his records and the LOE was removed. The copy of the contested report he received had an overall rating of 4; however, the report filed into his records had an overall rating of 3. Both of the reports were almost identical in verbiage. The report filed in his record indicates he received feedback on 1 Sep 11 (sic); however, he has no record of receiving this feedback. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is currently serving in the Air National Guard (ANG) in the grade of technical sergeant (E-6). The applicant’s EPR profile is listed below: Period Ending Overall Evaluation 20 Jun 08 5 20 Jun 10 5 *18 Nov 10 3 30 Mar 12 5 16 Jan 13 4 16 Jan 14 5 *Contested Report According to AFI 36-2406, Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Systems, performance reports are not reaccomplished if lost or the missing report is more than 18 months past the close- out date. Furthermore, if it has been more than 18 months since the close-out of the report, an AF Form 77 is prepared and filed in the record. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C and D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1PP notes the contested report was submitted into the applicant’s record beyond the 18 month limit allowed by the governing instruction and recommends removal of the contested report. A complete copy of the NGB/A1PP evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFRC/A1K notes the applicant alleges an existing AF Form 77 was removed from his records and replaced with a substandard EPR. However, it appears the applicant has not exhausted his administrative remedies in accordance with AFI 36-2401, Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Reports. The applicant’s claim should be referred to the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB) for review and determination. A complete copy of the AFRC/A1K evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 20 May 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). 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. To request the removal of a performance report, there is an available avenue of administrative relief the applicant has not first pursued. The applicant should have applied to the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB) prior to applying to the BCMR. 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 he has not exhausted all available avenues of administrative relief prior to submitting his application to the BCMR; and the application will only be reconsidered upon exhausting all subordinate avenues of administrative relief. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-04760 in Executive Session on 2 Sep 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-04760 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 Sep 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, NGB/A1PP, dated 16 Dec 13. Exhibit D. Letter, AFRC/A1K, dated 7 Apr 14. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 May 14.