RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01551
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) for the period 2 July 2007
through 1 July 2008 be corrected in Section V, Overall
Performance Assessment, to include markings under the Section
titled Truly Among the Best (5), for the Raters assessment and
the Additional Raters assessment.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
While using her records to prepare a decoration package, it was
noticed that her 2008 EPR had been closed out without any
markings in Section V on the back of the form. The report was
Firewall 5s and needs to be corrected before she retires.
In support of her application, the applicant provides a copy of
the contested EPR, and her retirement order.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant retired from the Regular Air Force effective
31 August 2010 in the grade of master sergeant (E-7). She served
23 years, 6 months, and 27 days on active duty. The following is
a resume of the applicants performance ratings:
PERIOD ENDING OVERALL EVALUATION
3 Feb 00 (SSgt) 5
2 Jun 00 5
6 Jun 01 5
6 Jun 02 5
17 Jan 03 (TSgt) 5
17 Jan 04 5
27 Aug 04 5
27 Aug 05 5
27 Aug 06 5
1 Jul 07 5
PERIOD ENDING OVERALL EVALUATION
1 Jul 08* Not Indicated
* Contested report
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIDEP recommends denial. 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.
On 9 June 2010, DPSIDEP returned the applicants package and
requested she obtain a statement from her evaluators to verify
what the rating is since one was not provided. However, they
have not received a response from the applicant.
DPSIDEP indicates the applicant blames her Squadron Personnel
Technician and AFPC for the error, although the applicant
reviewed and signed the EPR herself. Since the EPR is not
completed in accordance with Air Force Instruction 36-2406 and
the applicant has failed to provide the required documentation,
the EPR should be removed and replaced with an Air Force Form 77, Letter of Evaluation, with the following statement Report for
the period 2 July 2007 through 1 July 2008 is not available for
administrative reasons.
DPSIDEP indicates the Military Personnel System (MilPDS) reflects
the contested report has an overall rating of 5.
The DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant
on 15 October 2010 for review and response 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 an error or an injustice. We note
the applicant was asked to provide a statement from her
evaluators to verify what the rating should be on the contested
report since one was not provided. However, the applicant has
not responded. We also note AFPC/DPSIDEPs recommendation that
since the EPR in question was not completed in accordance with
the governing instruction, it should be removed and replaced with
an AF Form 77. We disagree. Since the report is now a matter of
record and the applicant has since retired, we believe the
contested report to be more beneficial to the applicant as
written than replacing it with an Air Force Form 77. In
addition, while we note MilPDS reflects a numerical rating of 5
as the overall performance assessment as contended by the
applicant, we are not inclined to correct the report absent
support from the rating chain. Accordingly, in the absence of
evidence to the contrary, we find no 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-2010-01551 in Executive Session on 19 January 2011,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in connection
with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-01551:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Apr 2010, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIDEP, dated 16 Sep 10.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Oct 10.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC 2009 00455
Therefore, an Air Force Form 77, Letter of Evaluation, has been placed in his record explaining the report is missing but the overall rating was a 3. Without a copy of the report, they are unable to determine whether the Article 15 was mentioned or whether it was the basis for the overall rating of 3. Additionally, without a copy of the report, or statements from the evaluators, they cannot confirm whether the report contained inaccurate information or not; therefore, the MilPDS update...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03057
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03057 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) rendered for the period 2 July 2009 through 15 April 2010 be voided and removed from her records. The following is a resume of the applicants EPR profile: PERIOD ENDING PROMOTION RECOMMENDATION 20 Dec 01 (SrA)...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01941
She was removed from that profile long enough in the spring of 2008 to delay her promotion to colonel and placed back on the identical profile in the summer of 2008 and ordered to meet a medical evaluation board. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AF/DPO recommends the applicants 2008 Training Report, Blocks 2 and 3, be changed to read meets standards in professional qualities and meets standards in Physical Fitness with PFT score of...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | bc-2009-01709
On 4 Feb 08, the applicant’s rater requested input from the previous rater for the EPR closing 28 Jan 08. On 13 Feb 08, the applicant appealed the EPR to the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB) contending the EPR indicated incorrect dates of supervision. A complete copy of the DPSIDEP evaluation is at Exhibit C.
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-2010-03630
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 | CY2009 | BC-2009-00137
When he questioned his supervisor about his performance rating, he was told he would receive a five rating. 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 6 Mar 09 for review and comment within 30 days. In addition, we note the feedback worksheet provided by the applicant supports the rating he received.
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01327
He was considered but not selected for promotion to the grade of SMSgt during the 96, 97, 98, 99, 00 and 01, E-8 promotion cycles. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial of his request to change his DOR to SMSgt. The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSIDEP recommends denial of his request for supplemental promotion consideration to the grade of CMSgt, to remove his EPR ending 12 October 1990, and...
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-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...