RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-01716
XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her Air Force (AF) Form 910, Enlisted Performance Report (AB thru TSgt), rendered for the period 20 Feb 07 through 19 Jun 08, be corrected to indicate “Clearly Exceeds” in Block 2, Standards, Conduct, Character & Military Bearing.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) is incorrectly marked as “Meets” standards under Block 2. The EPR clearly shows she is an outstanding Airman who has volunteered for numerous important events including assisting Protocol with the set-up for two Lieutenant Generals, resulting in her being recognized by 9 AF/CC and HQ USAF/A2.
In support of her request, the applicant provides a copy of the contested report.
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Information extracted from the Military Personnel Data System (MilPDS) indicates the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 20 Feb 07 as an airman basic (E-1) and has continually served on active duty. She is currently serving in the grade of airman first class (E-3), effective and with a date of rank of 20 Jun 08.
On 25 Jun 08, the applicant was furnished the contested EPR for the period 20 Feb 07 through 19 Jun 08, with an overall evaluation of “5.”
_______________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIDEP recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence the report is inaccurate or unjust. While the comments cited are commendable, there are a lot of other areas to consider. Only the evaluators know why they gave her the rating they did and the applicant has failed to provide any documentation to support her assertions, even after it was specifically requested.
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIDEP evaluation is at exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 9 Oct 09 for review and response within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D).
________________________________________________________________
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 warranting a change to the applicant’s EPR closing 19 Jun 08. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, 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 the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of 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-2009-01716 in Executive Session on 3 Dec 09, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
XXXXXXXXXX, Panel Chair
XXXXXXXXXX, Member
XXXXXXXXXX, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 Aug 08, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIDEP, dated 25 Sep 09.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Oct 09.
XXXXXXXXXX
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00706
Additionally, unit commanders may request an extension of the close-out date, when an individual is required to fitness test immediately preceding the EPR close-out date and fails to meet fitness standards. It appears the applicant contends that he was injured during the 22 Sep 08 PT test, and the test should be invalidated and the EPR closing on 9 Oct 08 should be declared void and removed from his records. Further, the Board is not persuaded the EPR should be voided, since he failed the...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-02730
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSIDEP recommends denial. The complete DPSIDEP evaluation is at Exhibit F. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF THE ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the additional Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 22 Jun 10, for review and comment...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00139
We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. We note the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence to substantiate that he was exempt from the PT during the periods of the referral EPRs. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00762
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00762 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) rendered for the period from 8 February 2008 through 1 October 2008 be changed to reflect the correct inclusive dates, remove duplicate bullet statements, and reflect the correct dates of supervision. She...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00155
Lastly, his supervisor and the assignment technician received Letters of Reprimand for their involvement in the PRP program; however, they did not receive referral EPRs. DPSIDEP states the EPR was not a referral report and it was processed in accordance with AFI 36-2401, Table 3.2, Rule 20, Disagreements, which states evaluators, should discuss disagreements when preparing reports. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00237
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He received an unfair and unjust rating without any documentation and there was no feedback during or before 4 Feb 07 through 3 Feb 08. The Evaluations Reports Appeals Board (ERAB) denied his appeal of the contested report. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03630
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03630 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His AF Form 910, Enlisted Performance Report (AB through TSgt) (EPR), rendered for the period 16 Mar 09 through 15 Mar 10 be replaced. DPSIDEP states there is no evidence of an error or injustice and the applicant has failed to provide any...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01551
DPSIDEP states the applicant did not file an appeal through the Evaluation Reports and Appeals Board (ERAB) under the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36- 2401, Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Reports; however, the ERAB reviewed the applicants request and recommended denial as they were not convinced the contested report was inaccurate or unjust. Since the EPR is not completed in accordance with Air Force Instruction 36-2406 and the applicant has failed to provide the...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02759
She requests the Board review the evidence presented to determine the justice of her Article 15 punishment. The evidence of record indicates the applicant's commander determined that she had committed the alleged offense of driving under the influence of alcohol, resulting in her nonjudicial punishment under Article 15. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03582
Evaluators must confirm they did not provide counseling or feedback, and that this directly resulted in an unfair evaluation. The complete DPSIDEP 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 14 Dec 07, for review and comment within 30 days. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES...