RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-00117
            INDEX CODE:  111.05

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) rendered  for  the  period  16 January
1999 to 15 January 2000, be declared void.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The EPR closing 15 January 2000 is considered a  non-promotable  report  and
will prevent him from further promotion opportunities.  The  EPR  was  rated
an overall “4” which indicates, “ready for promotion,” and sections 5 and  6
of the EPR provide promotion comments.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provided the ERAB Decision dated  28
June 2001, AF Form 948  Application  for  Correction/Removal  of  Evaluation
Reports, the EPR closing 15 January 2000, and other documentation.

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 grade  of
master sergeant, with an effective date of rank (DOR) of 1 November 2000.

The applicant appealed the contested report under the provisions of AFI  36-
2401 and the appeal was considered and  denied  by  the  Evaluation  Reports
Appeal Board (ERAB).





EPR profile since 1996 reflects the following:

      PERIOD ENDING    EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL

            17 Aug 96        5
         17 Aug 97           5
            17 Aug 98        5
            15 Jan 99        5
            14 Dec 00        5
       * 15 Jan 00           4 (Referral EPR)
            14 Dec 01        5
            14 Dec 02        5

* Contested report

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPE recommended denial.  They indicated  that  the  applicant  became
ineligible for promotion (due to this referral EPR) after he had tested  and
received his scores.  It is the  applicant’s  contention  that  had  he  not
received a referral EPR (causing his ineligibility for promotion), he  would
have scored high enough to be promoted to the next higher grade.   The  ERAB
was accurate in their evaluation.  The applicant has failed to  provide  any
evidence  that  the  referral  comment  in  his  15  January  2000  EPR  was
inaccurate.  In fact, the applicant (in his rebuttal to  the  referral  EPR)
acknowledges that he “made a mistake”  during  the  reporting  period.   Air
Force policy is that an evaluation report is accurate  as  written  when  it
becomes a matter of  record.   The  applicant  has  failed  to  provide  any
evidence that the 15 January 2000 EPR was inaccurate.

The evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPWB deferred to the recommendation of AFPC/DPPPE.  The  first  cycle
the contested report would normally have been considered was the 00E7  cycle
(promotions effective August 2000 - July 2001).  However, the fact that  the
EPR was a referral rendered him ineligible for  promotion  consideration  in
accordance with AFI 36-2502, Table 1.1, Rule 22.  Should  the  AFBCMR  grant
the  applicant’s  request  to  void  the  EPR,  he  would  be  entitled   to
supplemental  consideration  beginning  with  cycle  00E7  provided  he   is
otherwise eligible and  recommended  by  the  commander.   As  a  matter  of
information, the applicant was selected for promotion to MSgt  during  cycle
02E7 with a date of rank of 1 November 2002.

The evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________



APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 4 April 2003, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded  to  the
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  law  or
regulations.

2.    The application was timely filed.

3.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to  demonstrate  the
existence of probable error or injustice.  After  thoroughly  reviewing  the
evidence of record we are not persuaded that the contested report should  be
declared void and removed from his records.  We note that the applicant  has
not submitted any supporting documentation from the  rating  chain  and  has
failed to provide evidence showing that  the  report  was  not  an  accurate
assessment as rendered.  While we cannot determine what was  the  nature  of
the  applicant’s  dereliction  of  duty,  it  was  apparently   sufficiently
significant that the rating chain determined it should be reflected  on  the
contested EPR.  Furthermore, the  applicant  readily  acknowledges  that  he
made a mistake during the rating  period.   The  supporting  statements  are
duly noted; however, the authors of these statements were  not  tasked  with
assessing  the  applicant’s  duty  performance  during  the  contested  time
period.  We therefore agree with the opinions  and  recommendations  of  the
Air Force and adopt their rationale as the basis  for  our  conclusion  that
the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.   Therefore,
in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling  basis  to
recommend granting the relief sought.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate
the existence of an error or an 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-2003-
00117 in Executive Session on 12 June 2003, under the provisions of AFI  36-
2603:

                 Mr. Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Vice Chair
                 Mr. Joseph A. Roj, Member
                 Ms. Cheryl Jacobson, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 December 2002, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPE, dated 20 March 2003.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 27 March 2003.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 April 2003.




                       THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                       Vice Chair