RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00362 

 INDEX CODE: 111.02 

 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE 

 

HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His Air Force Form 911, Enlisted Performance Report (MSgt thru 
CMSgt), rendered for the period 2 March 2008 through 1 March 
2009, be corrected to reflect the appropriate Duty Title in 
Section II, Block #1; and, the appropriate Key Duties, Tasks and 
Responsibilities in Block #3. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

The contested Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) did not reflect 
the correct duty title and key duties of his position at the time 
the EPR was closed. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of the 
contested EPR, a Personnel Data Worksheet, and Duty History. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air Force in 
the rank of master sergeant (E-7) with a date of rank of 1 June 
2006. 

 

The following is a resume of the applicant’s EPR profile: 

 

 PERIOD ENDING PROMOTION RECOMMENDATION 

 

 31 Oct 00 5 

 7 Sep 01 5 

 7 Oct 02 5 

 7 Oct 03 5 

 7 Oct 04 5 

 1 Aug 05 5 

 1 Aug 06 5 

 1 Mar 07 5 

 1 Mar 08 5 


 1 Mar 09* 5 

 

* Contested report 

 

The remaining relevant facts, extracted from the applicant’s 
service records, are contained in the advisory opinion prepared 
by the Air Force office of primary responsibility at Exhibit B. 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSIDEP recommends denial. DPSIDEP states the applicant did 
not file an appeal through the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board 
(ERAB) under the provisions of Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-
2401, Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Reports; 
however, the ERAB reviewed this appeal and recommends denial. 

 

DPSIDEP indicates the applicant provided a unit generated 
Personnel Data Worksheet, dated 19 October 2009, requesting his 
duty title be changed effective 1 December 2008. However, it was 
not initiated and/or approved by anyone in his rating chain as of 
the 1 March 2009 close-out date of the contested report. In 
addition, the applicant did not provide a reaccomplished report 
or any supporting documentation from the evaluators who signed 
the contested report explaining how they were hindered from 
rendering a fair and accurate assessment of the applicant’s 
performance prior to the report being made a matter of record. 
The applicant provided no explanation as to why he did not 
address the alleged inaccurate duty title and key duties prior to 
the EPR becoming a matter of record when he reviewed and signed 
the report on 18 March 2009. 

 

DPSIDEP states they are not convinced the contested report is 
inaccurate or unjust and do not support the applicant’s request. 

 

The complete AFPC/DPSIDEP 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 24 March 2010 for review and response within 30 days (Exhibit 
C). 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. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an error or an injustice. We took 
notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the 
merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and 
recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility 
and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the 
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. 
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no 
basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this 
application. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 

 

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that 
the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 
that 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-2010-00362 in Executive Session on 30 September 2010, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, Panel Chair 

 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, Member 

 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered for AFBCMR 
Docket Number BC-2010-00362: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 Oct 09, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSIDEP, dated 10 Mar 10. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Mar 10. 

 

 

 

 

 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 

 Panel Chair