RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-02202
                                        INDEX CODE:  111.02
  XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX                     COUNSEL:  NONE

  XXXXXXXXXXXX                          HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  11 January 2007

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) rendered for the period  of  2  August
2000 through 30 June 2002 be voided and removed from her records.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was never given performance feedback even though her EPR indicates  that
she received performance  feedback  on  10  June  2002.   In  addition,  her
additional rater helped the rater write her EPR by dictating the ratings.

In support of her request, the applicant submits copies of her  requests  to
remove/correct her EPR; the contested EPR; e-mail correspondence  concerning
the EPR in question; memorandums  from  her  commander  and  rater;  and  an
Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB) denial memorandum.   The  applicant’s
complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The  Military  Personnel  Database  (MilPDS)  indicates  the  applicant   is
currently assigned to the Air  Force  Reserve  with  an  Effective  Date  of
Initial Gain to Strength of 6 July 1994 and a Paydate of 6 July  1988.   She
was promoted to the grade of technical sergeant (E-6), effective and with  a
date of rank of 1 May 2003.  Her projected date of  separation  is  19  June
2007.

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

      PERIOD ENDING          PROMOTION RECOMMENDATION

    07 Jun 98                     5
    15 Jun 99                     5
    01 Aug 00                     5
    30 Jun 02*                    4
    30 Jul 03                     5
    30 Jul 05                     5

   *Contested report

According to  a  memorandum  from  the  Superintendent,  Board  Support  and
Evaluation Division, dated 25 April 2004, the  ERAB  considered  and  denied
the applicant’s request to void her EPR closing 30 June 2002.

On 20 July 2005, ARPC/DPBPP, requested the applicant provide a copy  of  the
additional rater’s e-mail, dated 10 July 2003, which the  applicant’s  cites
as an attachment in her Air Force Board for Correction of  Military  Records
application package.  To this date the applicant has not responded.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/DPB recommends denial of  the  applicant’s  request  to  void  her  EPR
closing on 30 June 2002.  DPB  states  all  evaluation  reports  are  deemed
valid and accurate when rendered, unless substantial  information  comes  to
light  to  contradict  the  initial  report.   Although  the  applicant  has
provided an e-mail from the additional rater bringing the  accuracy  of  the
feedback session date into question, this  alone  does  not  invalidate  the
EPR.   Air  Force  Instruction  36-4202,  Officer  and  Enlisted  Evaluation
System, paragraph  2.10  states  “While  documented  feedback  sessions  are
required by this  instruction,  they  do  not  replace  informal  day-to-day
feedback.  A rater’s failure to conduct a  required  or  requested  feedback
session, or document the session on a Performance  Feedback  Worksheet  will
not, of itself, invalidate any subsequent performance report.”  Whether  the
feedback session in  question  occurred  or  not  does  not  invalidate  the
applicant’s performance documented on the EPR.

It is DPB’s opinion that there is nothing in  the  applicant’s  records  nor
has she provided documentation to  indicate  the  EPR  was  inaccurate  when
rendered.  Additionally, the applicant has failed to submit  any  supporting
documentation to validate the claim that her rater was coerced  into  giving
ratings provided by the additional rater.  The  ARPC/DPB  evaluation  is  at
Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant  on  29
July 2005, for review and comment within 30 days.  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 probable error or injustice warranting favorable  consideration
of the applicant’s request that the contested report  be  removed  from  her
records.  The applicant asserts that the additional rater helped  the  rater
write the contested EPR by  dictating  the  ratings;  however,  we  find  no
persuasive documentation  was  provided  to  support  this  contention.   In
addition, the applicant claims she did not receive  a  performance  feedback
session on 10 July 2003 as indicated on  the  EPR.   We  note  the  comments
provided by the Air Force office of  primary  responsibility  that  although
Air Force policy does require performance feedback for  personnel,  it  does
not replace day-to-day feedback; and,  failure  to  conduct  a  required  or
requested  session  does  not,  of   itself,   invalidate   any   subsequent
performance documented on the report.  While we note the  comments  provided
by the applicant’s additional rater that he supports her  appeal  to  remove
the contested report, he does not  provide  reasoning  as  to  why  the  EPR
should be removed or what made the report inaccurate.  In view of the  above
and  in  the  absence  of  evidence  showing  the  contested  report  is  an
inaccurate depiction of her  performance  during  the  referent  period,  we
agree with the opinion  and  recommendation  of  the  Air  Force  office  of
primary responsibility.  Accordingly, her request to set aside  her  EPR  is
not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

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 14 December 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

            Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
            Mr. Wallace F. Beard Jr., Member
            Ms. Josephine L. Davis, Member


The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with  AFBCMR
Docket Number BC-2005-02202:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 29 Jun 05, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, ARPC/DPB, dated 26 Jul 05.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Jul 05.




                                  THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                                   Chair