RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  98-03251
                             INDEX CODE:  111.02

                             COUNSEL:  NONE

                             HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) rendered  for  the  period     1  June
1996 through 12 January 1997 be declared void and removed from her records.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She  used  her  chain  of  command  to  surface  underlying   unprofessional
relationship practices she observed within her  workcenter.   Once  she  did
she was singled out  for  constant  scrutiny,  daily  emotional  abuse,  and
career subversion by both her civilian supervisor, and her  civilian  flight
chief.  As a result, together they wrote and endorsed an undeserved  EPR  on
her.

She also states that she believes the report to be  unjust  because  of  the
personality conflicts that existed between her, her rater, and  her  rater’s
rater that exploded  after  she  approached  the  squadron  commander  about
unprofessional practices she observed going on  in  her  workcenter.   After
she reported these findings to the commander, the treatment she received  by
her bosses was so unbearable, the commander ended up removing her  from  the
workcenter altogether, but only after  trying  to  stabilize  the  situation
before it impacted her career.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a statement from  the  commander
stating, “Based upon my personal observations of  applicant’s  behavior  and
performance over the past year, I do not believe the performance report  for
the period in question was  an  objective  evaluation...This  is  the  worst
personality conflict I have seen between a supervisor and a  subordinate  in
sixteen years.”

Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air Force in the grade  of
technical sergeant.

The applicant filed a similar appeal under AFI 36-2401, which was denied  by
the Evaluation Report Appeals Board (ERAB).

EPR profile since 1995 reflects the following:

      PERIOD ENDING    EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL

        31 May 95                 4
        31 May 96                 4
       *12 Jan 97                 3
        11 Mar 98                 4

*  Contested report.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Chief, Appeals & SSB Branch, AFPC/DPPPA, reviewed this  application  and
states that at the time the report was  rendered,  the  commander  concurred
with the rater and indorser’s overall promotion  recommendation.   While  he
did change some of the ratings on the front  of  the  EPR  in  Section  III,
Evaluation of Performance, he did not upgrade the EPR  as  was  his  option.
They also state that it is important to  note  the  rater  prepared  a  fair
performance feedback identifying the applicant’s  strong  points  and  areas
needing improvement.  She also provided at least two  letters  of  reprimand
(LORs) during the reporting period for dereliction of  duty.   A  review  of
the applicant’s  rebuttal  comments  to  the  LORs  reveal  the  applicant’s
hostile and disrespectful attitude toward the supervisor.   They  point  out
that in worker-supervisor relationships, some disagreements  are  likely  to
occur since a worker must abide by a supervisor’s  policies  and  decisions.
Personnel who  do  not  perform  at  expected  standards  or  require  close
supervision may believe that an evaluator  is  personally  biased;  however,
the conflict generated by this personal attention  is  usually  professional
rather than personal.  The applicant filed a complaint  with  the  Inspector
General (IG) on 13 January 1997 but did not  include  their  findings.   She
did, however, admit they did not substantiate  her  claims.   Based  on  the
evidence provided, they recommend denial of applicant's request.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

The  Chief,  Inquiries/AFBCMR  Section,  AFPC/DPPPWB,  also  reviewed   this
application and states that should the Board void the  contested  report  in
its entirety, upgrade the overall rating,  or  make  any  other  significant
change, providing the applicant is otherwise eligible,  the  applicant  will
be entitled to supplemental promotion consideration  commencing  with  cycle
99E7.

A complete copy  of  their  evaluation,  with  attachment,  is  attached  at
Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 4 January 1999, copies of the Air Force  evaluations  were  forwarded  to
applicant for review and response within 30  days.   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 laws  or
regulations.

2.    The application was timely filed.

3.    Sufficient relevant evidence has been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence  of  probable  error  or  injustice  warranting  voidance  of  the
contested report.  After reviewing the evidence  of  record,  the  Board  is
convinced that the  contested  report  is  not  an  accurate  assessment  of
applicant's performance  during  the  period  in  question.   Based  on  the
statement submitted from  the  commander,  it  appears  that  a  personality
conflict existed between  the  applicant  and  the  rating  official.   This
statement also reveals that  the  possibility  exists  that  the  rater  was
unable to render an honest assessment of applicant's performance due to  the
conflict.  In view of the above, the Board  recommends  that  the  contested
report be declared void and removed  from  her  records.   In  addition,  we
recommend she be  provided  supplemental  promotion  consideration  for  all
appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 99E7.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air  Force  relating
to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that the Enlisted Performance Report,  AF
Form 910, rendered for the period 1 June 1996 through 12  January  1997,  be
declared void and removed from her records.

It  is  further  recommended  that  applicant   be   provided   supplemental
consideration for  promotion  to  the  grade  of  master  sergeant  for  all
appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 99E7.

If AFPC discovers any adverse factors during or subsequent  to  supplemental
consideration that are separate and  apart,  and  unrelated  to  the  issues
involved in  this  application,  that  would  have  rendered  the  applicant
ineligible for the  promotion,  such  information  will  be  documented  and
presented to the  board  for  a  final  determination  on  the  individual's
qualification for the promotion.

If  supplemental  promotion  consideration  results  in  the  selection  for
promotion to the higher grade, immediately after such promotion the  records
shall be corrected to show that applicant was promoted to the  higher  grade
on the date of rank established  by  the  supplemental  promotion  and  that
applicant is entitled to all pay, allowances, and benefits of such grade  as
of that date.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in  Executive
Session on 27 May 1999, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

            Mr. Douglas J. Heady, Panel Chair
            Dr. Gerald B. Kauvar, Member
            Ms. Peggy E. Gordon, Member
            Ms. Phyllis L. Spence, Examiner (without vote)

All members voted to correct the records,  as  recommended.   The  following
documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 9 Oct 98, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPA, dated 17 Dec 98.
      Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 2 Dec 98, w/atch.
      Exhibit E. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 4 Jan 99.




                             DOUGLAS J. HEADY
                             Panel Chair



AFBCMR 98-03251
INDEX CODE:  111.02



MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

      Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air
Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority
of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is
directed that:

      The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that the Enlisted
Performance Report, AF Form 910, rendered for the period 1 June 1996
through 12 January 1997, be, and hereby is, declared void and removed
from her records.

      It is further directed that applicant be provided supplemental
consideration for promotion to the grade of master sergeant for all
appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 99E7.

      If AFPC discovers any adverse factors during or subsequent to
supplemental consideration that are separate and apart, and unrelated
to the issues involved in this application, that would have rendered
the applicant ineligible for the promotion, such information will be
documented and presented to the board for a final determination on the
individual's qualification for the promotion.

      If supplemental promotion consideration results in the selection
for promotion to the higher grade, immediately after such promotion
the records shall be corrected to show that applicant was promoted to
the higher grade on the date of rank established by the supplemental
promotion and that applicant is entitled to all pay, allowances, and
benefits of such grade as of that date.





                             JOE G. LINEBERGER
                             Director
                             Air Force Review Boards Agency