RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-02173
            INDEX CODE:  111.02, 111.05
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) rendered for  the  period  closing  11
April 2006, be upgraded or declared void and removed from her records.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She did not have proper supervision during the rating period, statements  on
the contested EPR were falsified, she did not receive proper feedback  prior
to the closeout of her evaluation, and there was a personal conflict and  an
unfair bias toward her by her rater,  which  provided  for  a  hostile  work
environment.

In support of her request, the applicant provided  several  Memorandums  for
Record  (MFR),  character  references,  copies  of  the  contested  EPR  and
previous evaluations.

Her complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant contracted her initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force  on
25 May 1995.  She is currently serving in the grade of  technical  sergeant,
having been promoted to that grade with an effective  date  and  a  date  of
rank of 1 April 2005.  The  following  is  a  resume  of  her  EPR  ratings,
commencing with the report closing 24 January 1997:

      RATING PERIOD    PROMOTION RECOMMENDATION

      24 Jan 97  5
       8 Sep 97  5
       8 Sep 98  4
      26 Jun 99  5
      26 Jun 00  5
      26 Jun 01  5
      11 Jun 02  5

      RATING PERIOD    PROMOTION RECOMMENDATION

      11 Apr 03  5
      11 Apr 04  5
      11 Apr 05  5
      *11 Apr 06 4

      *Contested Report

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIDEP recommends denial.  DPSIDEP states that the applicant did  file
an appeal through the Evaluation  Reports  Appeals  Board  (ERAB);  however,
they recommended denial, not being convinced that the report  was  in  error
or unjust.

The contention that there were not enough days of supervision  was  reviewed
and recalculated.  After recalculating the number of days the applicant  and
rater were on travel, the days were  subtracted  from  the  days  of  actual
supervision and the result was changed from 296 to  251  days,  which  meets
the requirement by the governing AFI to generate an evaluation  (120  days).


Air Force policy requires  initial  feedback  within  60  days  of  starting
supervision and a  mid-term  feedback  at  the  halfway  point  between  the
initial and the close-out-date of the report.  In accordance  with  AFI  36-
2406,  Officer  and  Enlisted  Evaluations  Systems,  it  is   the   ratee's
responsibility to notify the rater, and  if  necessary  the  rater's  rater,
when a required or requested feedback did not occur.  In this case, she  did
not mention whether she requested feedback;  however,  she  did  receive  an
initial feedback where several issues were addressed.  She also  received  a
Letter of Reprimand (LOR) in  February  2006,  which  could  have  been  the
reason for the markdown.

The personality conflict and unfair biases have not  been  substantiated  by
the applicant.  She did not  prove  specific  instances  or  provide  actual
evidence that clearly corroborates bias or conflict.  She did submit  an  IG
complaint which was determined to be  without  cause  and  returned  to  the
applicant.

As for the falsification of government documents, the  rater  was  contacted
by DPSIDEP to provide three new bullets; however, the  rater  believes  that
the ratee's EPR was a fair  depiction  of  her  accomplishments  during  the
rating period; and although the ratee was  not  physically  present  at  the
event in question, she was in-charge of ensuring the event happened and  was
deserving of said credit.

The complete DPSIDEP evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was  forwarded  to  the  applicant  on  3
October 2008 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 error or injustice.  After reviewing the evidence provided,  we
are not persuaded that the contested report is an  inaccurate  depiction  of
the applicant’s performance and demonstrated potential  for  the  period  in
question.  The applicant's contentions regarding the  contested  report  are
duly noted.  However, in our opinion, her assertions  have  been  adequately
addressed by the Air Force office of  primary  responsibility  and  she  has
provided no evidence refuting their position.  Therefore, we agree with  the
opinion  and  recommendation  of   the   Air   Force   office   of   primary
responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion  that
the applicant has not been the victim of an  error  or  injustice.   In  the
absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling  basis
to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

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 AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-2008-
02173 in Executive Session on 5 November 2008, under the provisions  of  AFI
36-2603:

            Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
      Mr. Garry G. Sauner, Member
      Mrs. Lea Gallogly, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR  Docket  Number  BC-
2008-02713 was considered.

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 June 2008, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIDEP, dated 26 August 2008, w/atch.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 October 2008.




                                   CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
                                   Panel Chair