RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-00763
            INDEX CODE:  111.05
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) rendered for the period  of  1 Oct  05
thru 31 Dec 05 be voided and removed from her records.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The contested report was written based on a Letter of  Reprimand  (LOR)  she
received in January 06.  She was under investigation from  on/about  20  Dec
05 to 20 Jan 06.  She believes the report to be  unjust  for  the  following
reasons:

      1.  Her commander initiated a commander-directed  investigation  (CDI)
against her; however, she was not found guilty of the charges.

       2.  Although  the  investigation  did  not  end  until  Jan  06,  her
commander initiated a commander-directed EPR, backdated  to  31 Dec  05  and
made it a referral report.  This action  did  not  allow  her  to  test  for
Master Sergeant during the 2006 cycle.

       3.  She  received  an  LOR  dated  12  Jan  06,  for  conducting   an
unprofessional relationship with a subordinate.

The report refers to her as ineffective leader/supervisor and  yet  reflects
her as an example for others to follow.  The reasons  for  the  marked  down
area on the front of the  report  is  not  appropriately  explained  in  the
comments.  She never received a performance feedback or  verbal  counseling.
She was nominated for Noncommissioned Officer (NCO) of the Quarter for  Oct-
Dec 05.  There was no documentation to support a three rating  at  the  time
of the closeout date.  She did, however,  receive  letters  of  appreciation
during this time.

She does not want supplemental promotion consideration.  She only wants  the
report voided and removed from her record.

In support of the application, she submits a personal statement, a  copy  of
the contested report, the referral EPR memorandum, her rebuttal response  to
the referral EPR,  a  deployment  listing,  a  copy  of  her  EPR  prior  to
contested  report,  award  nomination,  a  character  statement   from   her
supervisor, an LOR, an AF Form 1058, Unfavorable  Information  File  Action,
her response to the LOR, Letters of Appreciation,  Security  Forces  Blotter
Backs, supervisor rosters, appointment rosters, eyewitness  statements,  and
child's sports schedule.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Information extracted from  the  Military  Personnel  Data  System  (MilPDS)
indicates the applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade  of
technical sergeant, having assumed that grade effective and with a  date  of
rank of 1 Jul 03.

The following is a resume of  the  applicant’s  EPR’s  commencing  with  the
report ending 8 Apr 07:

      PERIOD ENDING          PROMOTION RECOMMENDATION

       8 Apr 07        5
      21 Nov 06        5
*     31 Dec 05        3
      30 Sep 05        5
      30 Sep 04        5
      04 Nov 03        5
      04 Nov 02        5
      30 Apr 02        5
      30 Apr 01        5
      31 May 00        5
      31 May 99        5
      31 May 98        5
      31 May 97        5
      21 Nov 96        5


*Contested Report

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

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPSIMC recommends denial.  DPSIMC states the  applicant  was  issued
an LOR on 12 Jan 06  for  having  an  unprofessional  relationship  with  an
assigned subordinate.  DPSIMC notes the use of the  LOR  by  commanders  and
supervisors as an exercise of supervisory authority and  responsibility.   A
UIF was established on 20 Jan 06.

The complete DPSIMC evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPSIDEP recommends denial.  DPSIDEP states the  applicant  filed  an
appeal through the Evaluation Reports  Appeals  Board  (ERAB);  however  the
ERAB determined that the EPR was in compliance with  Air  Force  policy  and
denied relief.

DPSIDEP notes although a report  was  written  in  October  05,  a  CDI  was
initiated  in  December  05.   As  long  as  there  was  at  least  60  days
supervision, the investigation  alone  required  the  commander  to  make  a
decision whether or not  to  direct  another  report.   He  chose  to  write
another report and determined the close-out date.  The CDI did not  have  to
be complete in order to write the EPR.  In addition, it is  the  commander’s
responsibility to determine promotion testing eligibility.

She contends that the statement, "Experienced difficulty  in  distinguishing
between professional and unprofessional relationships with  subordinates  in
her chain of command" does not address what  behavior  or  what  action  was
conducted  for  this  perception  to   exist.    DPSIDEP   opines   she   is
misinterpreting the intent of the Air Force Instruction.

The complete DPSIDEP evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant submitted a three-page rebuttal statement reiterating many  of
the arguments made in her initial application.

In addition, she states that she does  not  have  any  additional  paperwork
regarding this case.  Her intentions were  not  to  have  the  LOR  and  UIF
removed from her records, but only to point out the close-out  date  of  the
contested report.

Her commander gave her the option of being placed on a control roster  which
would have caused  her  to  miss  two  testing  cycles;  or,  receiving  the
backdated EPR that prevented her from testing.  He expressed that she  would
likely have been promoted had she tested; however, he did not feel  she  was
ready to be a MSgt.

Her complete submission is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

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 an injustice regarding the applicant's request for  removal  of
her referral EPR.  We note that the referral  report  was  command-directed,
written  out-of-cycle  and  specifically  rendered   to   comment   on   her
performance over a 92-day period of supervision.  All evidence contained  in
her records indicate that prior to and immediately after  the  timeframe  in
question,  the  applicant's  performance  was  nothing  less  than  stellar;
therefore, it seems reasonable to assume a  personality  conflict  may  have
existed between the applicant and the Investigating  Officer.   Accordingly,
it is our opinion that the applicant has established reasonable doubt as  to
whether or not the contested report is a fair  and  accurate  assessment  of
her performance and demonstrated potential; thus, we  believe  in  order  to
resolve any potential injustices the  report  should  be  removed  from  her
records.  Therefore, we recommend her records 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 the AF Form 910  (AB  through  TSgt),
Enlisted Performance Report, rendered for the period 1  Oct  05  through  31
Dec 05 be declared void and removed from her records.

The following members of the Board considered this application in  Executive
Session on 7 Aug 08 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

            Mr. Michael J. Novel, Panel Chair
            Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Panel Member
            Mr. John E. Petitt, Panel Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-2008-00763:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 20 Feb 08, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSIMC, dated 26 Mar 08.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSIDEP, dated 15 Apr 08.
      Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 May 08.
      Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, undated.



            MICHAEL J. NOVEL
            Panel Chair


AFBCMR BC-2008-00763


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 APPLCIANT be corrected to show that the AF Form 910 (AB
through TSgt), Enlisted Performance Report, rendered for the period 1 Oct
05 through 31 Dec 05 be, and hereby is declared void and removed from her
records.



      JOE G. LINEBERGER
      Director
      Air Force Review Boards Agency