RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01345
            INDEX NUMBER:  111.00; 131.00
      XXXXXXXXXXXX     COUNSEL:  None

      XXX-XX-XXXX      HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) rendered on him for the  period
27 Jan 99 through 26 Jan 00 be voided and removed from  his  official
records.

He  be  given  supplemental  promotion  consideration  to   technical
sergeant (TSgt) during cycle 02E6.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was not given a fair performance from  his  supervisor  and  feels
that he was intentionally set up for failure.  He was not  given  any
performance feedback indicating that he was not meeting expectations.

The contested EPR does not reflect his outstanding work.

The applicant explains the sequence of events that took place in  his
receipt of the “4” rating on the contested report and his actions  to
appeal the report.  He indicates that he consciously waited until  he
had  received  two  additional  EPRs,  both  firewall   “5s”   before
submitting an appeal to the Evaluation  Reports  Appeal  Board.   His
appeal to the ERAB was returned due to his not  providing  statements
from all in his  rating  chain.   After  receiving  the  inputs,  the
applicant believed that his appeal to the ERAB was  futile  and  that
his best course of action was to send his case to the AFBCMR.

The applicant  discusses  his  promotion  to  staff  sergeant  (SSgt)
through the Stripes for Exceptional Performers  (STEP)  program.   He
rebuts the rationale  provided  by  his  section  commander  for  not
supporting removal of his contested  EPR  although  he  was  promoted
through the STEP program.

In support of his appeal the applicant provides a copy of his  appeal
to the ERAB, documentation on his promotion through the STEP program,
copies of performance reports, awards, and letters  of  support  from
various personnel and letters from his  rating  chain  not  submitted
with his ERAB appeal.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered the Air Force on 27 May 92.   He  is  presently
serving on active duty in the grade of SSgt.  A review  of  his  last
ten EPRs reveals nine with overall ratings of “5”  and  one  with  an
overall rating of “4.”  The applicant was selected for  promotion  to
the grade of TSgt during cycle 03E6.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPEP recommends denial of the applicant’s request to void  his
EPR closing 26 Jan 00.  The  ERAB  returned  the  applicant’s  appeal
without action because he did not provide statements from all of  the
rating chain.  He  has  now  provided  additional  information  (i.e.
statements from those within his rating chain) not presented  to  the
ERAB.  No one in the applicant’s rating chain  supports  voiding  his
EPR.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPWB  provides  information  regarding  the  impact   of   the
contested EPR on  the  applicant’s  promotion  opportunity.   If  the
AFBCMR voids the contested EPR, the applicant will become a  selectee
for promotion to TSgt during cycle 02E6,  pending  a  favorable  data
verification and recommendation of the commander.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to  the  applicant
on 8 Aug 03 for review and comments  within  30  days.   To  date,  a
response has not been received.

_________________________________________________________________

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 error or injustice.  The Board was persuaded by  the
support the applicant initially received from  his  indorser  stating
that he believed that the applicant deserved a “5”  rating  and  that
the applicant was the victim of inappropriate supervision.  The Board
notes that the indorser later withdrew his support for  removing  the
EPR from the applicant’s records.  However, we are  troubled  by  his
admission that he signed blank forms and, apparently,  did  not  have
any concern over what markings and  comments  might  be  put  in  the
report under his signature.  The indorser discusses  the  applicant’s
EPR in both his original letter of support and subsequent  withdrawal
of support as if  he  were  an  uninvolved  party  in  preparing  the
applicant’s report.   Under Air Force policy the indorser (additional
rater) has a significant responsibility to ensure the ratee  receives
an accurate, unbiased, and uninflated report.  In this instance,  the
indorser has created much doubt as  to  whether  this  occurred.   As
such, we believe this doubt  should  be  resolved  in  favor  of  the
applicant.  Therefore, we recommend that the applicant’s  records  be
corrected as indicated below.

_________________________________________________________________

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 (AB thru TSgt), AF  Form  910,  rendered  for  the
period 27 Jan 99 through 26 Jan 00, be declared void and removed from
his records.

It  is  further  recommended  that  he   be   provided   supplemental
consideration for promotion to the grade of technical sergeant    (E-
6) beginning with cycle 02E6.

If selected for  promotion  to  technical  sergeant  by  supplemental
consideration,   he   be   provided   any   additional   supplemental
consideration required as a result of that selection.

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 qualifications 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 he was promoted to the higher
grade on the date of rank established by the  supplemental  promotion
and that he is entitled to all pay, allowances, and benefits of  such
grade as of that date.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number  BC-2003-
01345 in Executive Session on 8 October 2003, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:

      Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
      Ms. Martha Maust, Member
      Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Member

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

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 11 Apr 03, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPPEP, dated 14 Jul 03.
     Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 17 Jul 03.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Aug 03.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair


AFBCMR BC-2003-01345


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 XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, XXX-XX-XXXX, be corrected to show
that the Enlisted Performance Report (AB thru TSgt), AF Form 910,
rendered for the period 27 Jan 99 through 26 Jan 00, be, and hereby
is, declared void and removed from his records.

      It is further directed that he be provided supplemental
consideration for promotion to the grade of technical sergeant (E-
6) beginning with cycle 02E6.

      If selected for promotion to technical sergeant by
supplemental consideration, he be provided any additional
supplemental consideration required as a result of that selection.

      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 qualifications 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 he was
promoted to the higher grade on the date of rank established by the
supplemental promotion and that he is entitled to all pay,
allowances, and benefits of such grade as of that date.




            JOE G. LINEBERGER
            Director
            Air Force Review Boards Agency