RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-03771
            INDEX CODE:  111.03; 107.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE:  15 JUNE 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Examiner’s Note:  The applicant’s spouse submits the following requests  and
contentions on behalf of her husband.  In addition to his signature  on  the
application, he has submitted legal documentation authorizing her to act  on
his behalf.

The following changes be made to his records:

      1)  His Evaluation Performance Report (EPR) for the  period  of  1 May
97 – 17 Sep 97, and any other effects that may have  resulted  from  it;  be
removed from his records;

      2)  His First Sergeant Air Force Specialty Code  (AFSC)  of  8F000  be
reinstated;

      3)  Retirement certificates for him and his spouse be provided; and,

      4)  He be awarded the Meritorious Service Medal (MSM)

In addition to the above, a small retirement ceremony at  a  local  base  is
also requested.

In support of his application,  the  applicant  submits,  his  authorization
statement, a statement from his spouse, a copy of  his  DD  214,  copies  of
award nomination package(s), copies  of  certificates,  and  copies  of  his
EPRs.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His last EPR was absolutely absurd in comparison with  his  entire  career’s
worth of reports.  He participated in many  special  assignments  throughout
his career and was nominated for the “12 Outstanding  Airmen  of  the  Year”
award twice.  He was awarded “First Sergeant of the Year” for  his  squadron
and numbered Air Force, and subsequently competed at  the  HQ  USAFE  level.
He served in Desert Shield/Storm.  He also completed his  Bachelor’s  Degree
and made the Dean’s list many times.

In support of the application, the applicant submits  a  personal  statement
of explanation, copies of his EPRs/APRs and awards.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant was honorably discharged and retired in the  grade  of  master
sergeant (E-7), on 31 Mar 1998.  He served 23 years, 9 months and 8 days  of
active duty service.

The applicant received an overall rating  of  “2”  on  his  report  for  the
period  ending  17  Sep  97.   The  applicant  was  rated  “5”  and/or  “9,”
respectively, on all of his other performance reports with the exception  of
three reports for which he received an overall rating of “8.”

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted  from
the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letters  prepared  by
the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibits C, D, and E.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPPEP recommends denial of the  applicant’s  request  to  void  the
contested EPR.  DPPPEP states the EPR was designed to provide a  rating  for
a specific period of  time  based  on  the  performance  noted  during  that
period, not based on previous performance.

DPPPEP explains disagreements in the work place  are  not  unusual  and,  in
themselves, do not substantiate an evaluator cannot  be  objective.   DPPPEP
opines  that  subordinates  are  required  to  abide  by  their   superior’s
decisions and supposes if a personality conflict  were  as  evident  as  the
applicant perceived,  the  rater’s  rater  would  have  made  any  necessary
adjustment(s) to the applicant’s EPR.  DPPPEP notes the  applicant  has  not
provided any documentation which  supports  his  claim.   In  addition,  the
applicant’s IG complaint was returned  to  him  without  action  because  he
failed to exhaust the appropriate appeal procedures.

DPPPEP concludes the application is  untimely  and  may  also  be  dismissed
under the equitable doctrine of laches, which denies relief to one  who  has
unreasonably and inexcusably delayed in asserting a claim.

The complete DPPPEP evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPAC recommends denial regarding the applicant’s  request  to  void
the action  taken  to  withdraw  his  First  Sergeant  AFSC.   DPPAC  states
according to  the  guidance  in  effect  at  the  time  of  the  applicant’s
retirement,  AFI  36-2101,  Classifying  Military  Personnel  (Officer   and
Enlisted), 1 May 98, action to withdraw an  AFSC  can  be  taken  when  duty
performance indicates an airman is unable to perform tasks  associated  with
his or her skill level, which in this case is supported by  the  performance
report for the period 1 May 97 to 17 Sep 97.

The complete DPPAC evaluation is at Exhibit D.

HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends denial of the  applicant’s  request  for  the  MSM.
DPPPR states, no official  documentation  was  located  in  the  applicant’s
record to verify his entitlement to the MSM.   DPPPR  explains  the  written
recommendation for the MSM must meet two criteria:

      1)   be made  by  someone  other  than  the  member  himself,  in  the
member’s chain of command  at  the  time  of  the  incident,  and,  who  has
firsthand knowledge of the acts or achievements,

      2)  be  submitted  through  a  congressional  member  who  can  ask  a
military service to review a proposal for a decoration based on  the  merits
of the  proposal  and  the  award  criteria  in  existence  when  the  event
occurred.

DPPPR states the applicant must provide a  recommendation  from  someone  in
his chain of command and proposed citation for award of the MSM.

The complete DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force Evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 16  Apr
07, for review and comment within 30 days.  As of  this  date,  this  office
has received no response (Exhibit F).

_________________________________________________________________

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.  Sufficient relevant evidence  has  been  presented  to  demonstrate  the
existence of an injustice regarding the applicant's request for  removal  of
his referral EPR.  We note that the referral  report  was  command-directed,
written  out-of-cycle  and  specifically  rendered   to   comment   on   his
performance over a 78-day period of supervision; however,  no  documentation
exists which describes any prior  negligent  behavior  to  lead  to  such  a
report.  In fact, all evidence contained in his records indicate that  prior
to the timeframe in question, the applicant's performance throughout his 23-
plus years of service was nothing less than  stellar;  therefore,  it  seems
reasonable to assume a personality conflict may  have  existed  between  the
applicant and  the  rater.   In  our  opinion,  the  applicant's  image  was
tarnished and the final report  unfairly  casts  a  negative  light  on  his
service over his entire Air Force career.  In accordance with the office  of
primary  responsibility,  the  applicant  was  entitled   to   receive   the
appropriate retirement certificates, given his honorable  years  of  service
and retirement; therefore, we believe he and his  spouse  should  be  issued
the certificates.  However, his request for a small retirement  ceremony  is
outside the  purview  of  the  Board.   Regrettably,  insufficient  relevant
evidence exists to warrant granting the applicant's  request  for  the  MSM.
There is no documentation present in his records to  indicate  he  was  ever
considered or nominated  for  this  award.   Finally,  regarding  his  First
Sergeant AFSC, it is not clear from the  records  that  his  AFSC  was  ever
withdrawn as this AFSC is listed on his DD 214 issued at  the  time  of  his
retirement.  Therefore, in view of  the  foregoing,  and  in  an  effort  to
offset any possibility of an injustice, we believe  the  applicant’s  record
should be corrected to the extent 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:

      1)  The Enlisted Performance Report (MSgt thru CMSgt),  AF  Form  911,
Jun 95, rendered for the period of 1 May 97 thru  17  Sep  97,  be  declared
void, and removed from his records.

       2)  He  and  his  spouse  be  provided  the  appropriate   retirement
certificates.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in  Executive
Session on 19 July 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

            Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
            Ms. Teri G. Spoutz,Member
            Ms. Patricia R. Collier, Member

All members voted to correct the records,  as  recommended.   The  following
documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-2006-03771:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Nov 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPEP dated 22 Jan 07.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPAC, dated 16 Feb 07.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPR, dated 14 Mar 07.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 Apr 07.




                                   MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
                                   Panel Chair


AFBCMR BC-2006-03771




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

      a)  The Enlisted Performance Report (MSgt thru CMSgt),  AF  Form  911,
Jun 95, for the period of 1 May 97 thru  17  Sep  97,  be,  and  hereby  is,
declared void, and removed from his records.

       b)  He  and  his  spouse  be  provided  the  appropriate   retirement
certificates.





      JOE G. LINEBERGER
      Director
      Air Force Review Boards Agency


Attachment:
Copy of EPR