RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-03399
            INDEX CODE:  111.02

      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) closing 8 Sep  06  be  voided
and removed from his record.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His EPR, closing 8 Sep 06, was downgraded by his commander  because
he was medically disqualified for the  1A3X1  Air  Force  Specialty
Code (AFSC) even though his EPR was  for  workgroup  manager  (WGM)
duties  under   AFSC   9A000   (awaiting   retraining).    He   was
nondeployable because of his condition.

He did not receive a required feedback during the rating period  as
required by Air Force Instruction (AFI).  While he understands this
alone does not invalidate an EPR, he never  received  any  negative
feedback during the rating period and fully expected to  receive  a
“5”  rating.   In  his  previous  EPR,  he  received  a  letter  of
counseling (LOC), a letter  of  admonishment  (LOA),  a  letter  of
reprimand (LOR), and an Article 15 and still received a “4” rating.


In support of his appeal, applicant submits a  personal  statement;
copies of the EPRs closing 25  Nov  05  and  the  contested  report
8 Sep 06, and email correspondence.

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

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant is currently serving as a  staff  sergeant  with  a  Duty
Title as Assistant Workgroup Manager.

A resume of applicant’s EPR profile follows:

            PERIOD CLOSING              OVERALL EVALUATION

                 22 Mar 05                                    4
                 25 Nov 05                                    4
*                08 Sep 06                                    3
                 08 Sep 07                                    5

* - The  contested  report  rendered  for  the  period  26  Nov  05
– 8 Sep 06  reflects  224  days  of  supervision  and   Performance
Feedback as accomplished on 14 Jul 06.

Applicant filed an appeal under  the  provisions  of  AFI  36-2401,
Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Reports.  The Evaluation
Reports Appeal Board (ERAB) denied the requested relief.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPSID reviewed this application and recommends denial.

In accordance with AFI 36-2401, paragraph A1.5.8., only members  in
the rating chain can confirm  if  counseling  and/or  feedback  was
actually provided; whether formal or informal; whether verbal or in
writing.  While current Air Force policy requires a formal feedback
documented on the  AF  Form  931,  Performance  Feedback  Worksheet
(PFW), a direct correlation between information provided during the
feedback sessions, and the assessment on  evaluation  reports  does
not necessarily exist.  Additionally, a formal  feedback  does  not
negate any day-to-day interaction that  may  include  any  type  of
formal feedback/counseling, whether verbal or  in  writing.   There
may be occasions when feedback was not provided during a  reporting
period; unfortunately  for  the  applicant  however,  the  lack  of
counseling or feedback, by itself, is not sufficient  justification
to challenge the accuracy or justness of a report.  Evaluators must
confirm they did not provide counseling or feedback,  and  that  it
directly resulted in an unfair evaluation.

Additionally, an evaluation report is considered to  represent  the
rating chain’s best judgment at the time it is  rendered.   Once  a
report is accepted for file, only strong evidence to  the  contrary
warrants correction or removal from an  individual’s  record.   The
burden of proof is on the applicant and he  has  not  substantiated
the contested  report  was  not  rendered  in  good  faith  by  all
evaluators based on knowledge available at the time.

HQ AFPC/DPPPEP’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

___________________________________________________________________



APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Upon receiving the denial of his request to the ERAB, he  attempted
to contact his rater, rater’s rater, and commander of his unit that
issued the report.  His rater informed him that his  rater’s  rater
made him change the rating and that he did not believe he  deserved
the “3” rating.  His rating chain should have nonconcurred with the
rater’s rating rather than forcing him to change his rating.

In support of his appeal, he  provides  a  personal  statement  and
email correspondence.

Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E.

___________________________________________________________________

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  error  or  injustice.   We  took  notice  of  the
applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the  case,
including the  emails  from  his  commander  and  his  rater.   The
applicant filed an appeal with the Evaluation Reports Appeal  Board
(ERAB); however, the ERAB was not convinced  the  contested  report
was in error and denied relief.  While the commander was  justified
and within his discretionary authority to determine the  rating  he
believed the applicant should receive,  a  majority  of  the  Board
believes there may have been mitigating  circumstances  surrounding
the rating from his supervisor.  In  this  respect,  based  on  the
evidence presented, a majority of the Board finds that although not
conclusive, it appears the applicant’s rater may have been  coerced
into changing his rating by the commander and first sergeant.   The
governing directive, AFI 36-2406, Officer and  Enlisted  Evaluation
System, Chapter 3.2, states  that  it  is  the  additional  rater’s
responsibility to complete Section VI by concurring  or  noncurring
with the rater and making comments.  Therefore, a majority  of  the
Board believes that any doubt should be resolved in the applicant’s
favor and recommends the EPR closing 8 September 2006 be voided and
removed from his record.

___________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the  Air  Force
relating to APPLICANT, be  corrected  to  show  that  the  Enlisted
Performance Report (AB thru TSgt), AF IMT  910,  rendered  for  the
period 26 November 2005 through 8 September 2006,  be,  and  hereby
is, declared void and removed from his records.

___________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket  Number
BC-2008-03399 in Executive Session on 8  January  2009,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. James W. Russell III, Panel Chair
      Ms. Michele M. Rachie, Member
      Mr. Kurt R. LaFrance, Member

By a majority,  the  members  voted  to  correct  the  records,  as
recommended.  Ms. Rachie voted to deny the applicant’s request  and
did  not  want  to  submit  a  minority  report.    The   following
documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Sep 08, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSID, dated 22 Sep 08.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Oct 08.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, undated, w/atch.




                                   JAMES W. RUSSELL III
                                   Panel Chair




AFBCMR BC-2008-03399




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 XXXXXXX, XXXXXXX, be corrected to show that the
Enlisted Performance Report (AB thru TSgt), AF IMT 910, rendered
for the period 26 November 2005 through 8 September 2006, be, and
hereby is, declared void and removed from his records.






            JOE G. LINEBERGER
            Director
            Air Force Review Boards Agency