RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-03334
            INDEX CODE:  111.02
      XXXXXXXXXXXX     COUNSEL:  NONE

      XXXXXXXXXXXX     HEARING DESIRED:  NOT INDICATED


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  30 APR 2006


_________________________________________________________________


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) closing  out  2  June  2000,  be
replaced.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The EPR does not include  numerous  significant  accomplishments.   He
believes the omitted accomplishments are significant, legitimate,  and
necessary to reflect to future commanders the level of  excellence  he
has achieved and pursues.

In support of his request,  the  applicant  provided  a  copy  of  the
contested EPR, a copy of a proposed replacement EPR, and statements of
support from his rating chain.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic  on
26 June 1986, and currently serves  in  the  grade  of  senior  master
sergeant.  During the contested time period, the applicant was serving
in the Regular Air Force, in the grade of master sergeant.

A profile of the applicant’s EPR’s follows:

                   PERIOD ENDINGS                  OVERALL RATING


                  2 May 04                      5`

                  2 May 03                      5

                  2 May 02                      5

                  2 May 01                      5

                 *2 Jun 00                      5

                  2 Jun 99                      5

                 15 Jan 99                      5

                  1 Jun 98                      5

                  7 Jun 97                      5

                  1 Jun 96                      5


* Contested report

On 11 April 2002, the Evaluation Reports Appeal  Board  (ERAB)  denied
the applicant’s request to replace the EPR and concluded  he  did  not
provide sufficient documentation to substantiate his claim.
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPE recommends denial.  DPPPE  states  retrospective  views  of
facts and circumstances, months or even years  after  the  report  was
written, will not overcome the ERAB’s  presumption  that  the  initial
assessment remains valid.  Evaluation reports are considered  accurate
as written unless substantial evidence to the  contrary  is  provided.
As such, they receive exhaustive reviews prior to becoming a matter or
record.

Any  report  can  be  written  to  be  harder  hitting,   to   provide
embellishments, or enhance the ratee’s promotion potential.   But  the
time to do that is before the report becomes a matter of record.  None
of the supporters of the applicant’s  appeal  explain  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 appeals process does not exist  to  recreate  history  or
enhance chances for promotion.  It appears this is  exactly  what  the
applicant is attempting to do--recreate history.  As  such,  DPPPE  is
not convinced the contested report is not accurate as written and does
not support the request for removal and replacement

AFPC/DPPPWB defers  to  the  recommendation  of  DPPPE  regarding  the
replacement  of  the  contested  report.   DPPPWB  states  the  policy
regarding the approval of SNCO  supplemental  promotion  consideration
regarding an EPR is in accordance with AFI 36-2502,  Airman  Promotion
Program, Table 2.5, dated 20  August  2001  and  HQ  AFPC/DPP  081945Z
November  2000  message,  effective  22  October  2000.   Supplemental
promotion consideration is granted on a case-by-case basis for reasons
listed  in  table  2.5.   A  member  will  not  normally  be   granted
supplemental consideration  if  the  error  or  omission  appeared  on
his/her Data Verification Record or in the Unit Personnel Record Group
and the individual did not take the appropriate corrective  or  follow
up action before the original board convened.   The  purpose  of  this
change is to reduce the number of after  the  fact  changes  that  are
initiated in an effort to get a second opportunity for promotion.  The
applicant did not pursue a change to this EPR through the ERAB until 4
March 2002, well after  the  board  convened  for  the  01E8  cycle  5
February 2001.

DPPPWB states the first time the contested  report  was  used  in  the
promotion process was cycle 01E8 to senior master sergeant.  His board
score was 367.50, total score was 635.03, and the score  required  for
selection in his AFSC was 648.88.   The  applicant  was  selected  for
promotion to senior master sergeant during the next cycle  (02E8)  and
received a date of rank of 1 January 2003.

DPPPWB states the contested report was used in the  promotion  process
during the applicant’s first look  to  chief  master  sergeant  (cycle
04E9).  His board score was 345.00, total score was  616.65,  and  the
score required for selection in his AFSC was 618.42.  Should the Board
grant the applicant’s request to replace the contested EPR,  he  would
be eligible for supplemental promotion  consideration  beginning  with
cycle 04E9.

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

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 11
Mar 2005 for review and comment 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 not  timely  filed;  however,  it  is  in  the
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

3.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of error or  injustice.   We  carefully  considered  the
applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the  case  to
include the comments from the rater and reviewer; however, we are  not
persuaded that the  contested  report  should  be  declared  void  and
replaced with a reaccomplished report.  We agree with the opinions and
recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and
adopt their rationale  as  the  basis  for  our  conclusion  that  the
applicant has not been  the  victim  of  an  error  or  an  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 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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 24 May 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Ms. Marilyn M. Thomas, Vice Chair
                 Ms. Jan Mulligan, Member
                 Mr. Michael V. Barbolino, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 Oct 2004, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPP, dated 9 Mar 05.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Mar 05.




      MARILYN M. THOMAS
      Vice Chair
AFBCMR BC-2004-03334



MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

      Having reviewed 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 XXXXXXXXXXXX, be corrected to show that the Senior Enlisted
Performance Report (EPR), AF Form 911, rendered for the period 3 June
1999 through 2 June 2000, be, and hereby is, declared void and removed
from his records; and the attached EPR be inserted in its place.

      It is further directed that he be provided supplemental consideration
for promotion to the grade of senior master sergeant for all appropriate
cycles beginning with cycle 01E8.

      If selected for promotion to senior master 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.




                             JOE G. LINEBERGER
                             Director
                             Air Force Review Boards Agency

Attachment:
Reaccomplished EPR
                          SAF/MR STAFF ACTION SHEET
|SUBJECT: PACKAGE:  AFBCMR Case of        |EXTERNAL CONTROL #:                    |
|XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX                         |                                       |
|                                         |SAF/MR #:                              |
|                                         |SAF/MR DUE DATE:                       |
|ROUTING SEQUENCE                                 |ACTION REQUIRED                |
|3   |ASAF               |    |MA                 |3     |Signature               |
|    |PD                 |    |XO                 |1&2   |Review/Coordinate       |
|    |MRM                |    |Copy To:           |      |For Information Only.   |
|    |MRE                |1   |MRB Atty           |      |Other:_____________     |
|    |MRR                |    |                   |      |                        |
|2   |MRB                |    |                   |      |                        |


BACKGROUND SUMMARY:  Applicant requests an Enlisted Performance Report
(EPR) closing 2 June 2000, be replaced with a reaccomplished report.  He
alleges the EPR does not include numerous significant accomplishments.  The
rater and rater’s rater submit statements of support.

The Office of Primary Responsibility (OPR) recommends denial stating EPRs
are considered accurate as written unless substantial evidence to the
contrary is provided.  They speculate the raters are attempting to make
these changes in order to provide the applicant another opportunity to
compete for promotion.  The AFBCMR panel agreed with the OPR and denied
relief.

PURPOSE:  To forward a proposed memorandum overturning the Board’s decision
to deny the applicant’s request.

View of DAS:  Having no basis to question the integrity of the rating
chain, the DAS believes the benefit of any doubt should be resolved in the
applicant’s favor by granting his request.

Recommendation:  ASAF sign the attached proposed memorandum.

Action Officer/Office:  Mr. Burton/AFBCMR/
Date of preparation:  30 June 2005           DAS
Signature/Date:__________________________
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------
PRINCIPAL DEPUTY COMMENTS:


                                        Initial/Date:
____________________________________
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------
ASSISTANT SECRETARY COMMENTS:


Initial/Date:__________________________________________
Revised 15 August 2001; previous editions obsolete.