RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04557
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her AF Form 910, Enlisted Performance Report (AB thru TSgt),
rendered for the period 21 Feb 09 through 3 Sep 09 be removed
from her records.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The rating she received on the performance report in question was
due to a personality conflict between her and her rater.
In support of her appeal, the applicant provides a personal
statement and documents extracted from her military personnel
records, which include documentation related to her similar
appeal to the Evaluation Reports Appeals Board (ERAB).
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of
Staff Sergeant (SSgt).
The applicants EPR profile as a SSgt is listed below:
PERIOD ENDING OVERALL EVALUATION
15 Apr 05 5
20 Feb 06 5
20 Feb 07 5
20 Feb 08 5
20 Feb 09 5
*3 Sep 09 3
27 Apr 10 5
*Contested Report
The applicant filed an appeal with the ERAB. However, the ERAB
was not persuaded the contested report was inaccurate or unjust
and denied her request.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the
Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of the applicants request to void
the contested report. In a worker-supervisor relationship, some
disagreements are likely to occur since the worker must abide by
a supervisors policies and decisions. Personnel who do not
perform at expected standards or require close supervision may
believe that an evaluator is personally biased; however, the
conflict generated by this personal attention is usually
professional rather than personal. The applicant has not
provided any evidence showing the rater was unfavorably biased
toward her, the alleged personality conflict prevented the
evaluator from preparing a fair and accurate report, or the
report in question was not rendered in good faith by all
evaluators based on the knowledge available to them at the time.
An evaluation report is considered to represent the rating
chains 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 the individuals record.
Notwithstanding the above, the through date and number of days
supervision of the contested report are erroneous and should be
administratively corrected to reflect 28 Aug 09 and 120 days,
respectively.
The complete AFPC/DPSID 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 25 Feb 11 for review and comment 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. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. After a
thorough review of the facts and circumstances of this case, we
believe the applicant has been the victim of an error or
injustice. We note the comments of the Air Force office of
primary responsibility, indicating the applicant has failed to
sustain her burden of proof; however, we believe she has raised
sufficient doubt regarding the equity and accuracy of the
contested EPR. In this respect, we note the overall rating of
the contested report represents a significant regression when
compared to her performance history both prior and subsequent to
the period under review; and there was no evidence of any adverse
actions or misconduct on the part of the applicant. Therefore,
in order to preclude the possibility of an injustice to the
applicant, we believe it appropriate to resolve any doubt in her
favor and recommend the contested report be declared void and
removed from her records. Accordingly, we recommend her records
be corrected as indicated below.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show the AF Form 910, Enlisted Performance Report (AB thru TSGT), rendered for the
period 21 February 2009 through 3 September 2009 be declared void
and removed from her records.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2010-04557 in Executive Session on 7 Sep 11, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
All members voted to correct the records as recommended. The
following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 17 Nov 10, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 24 Jan 11.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Feb 11.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04430
The applicant received the Article 15 in 2008 and the 2009 report was removed from his records, but the 2010 report was rendered under the supervision of new evaluators. Furthermore, no evidence was provided to support the contention that the 6 Mar 10 performance report was the result of the Article 15. The complete AFPC/DPSOE evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He did...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04000
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His rater signed the EPR notice stating the Record of Counseling (ROC) was in his Personnel Information File (PIF) when it was not. The applicants EPR profile as a SSgt is listed below: PERIOD ENDING OVERALL EVALUATION 1 Jul 10 4 **9 Nov 09 3 25 Dec 08 4 *25 Oct 07 3 *Contested Report ** Referral Report The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03754
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03754 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. The complete HQ USAF/A1PP evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSID recommends voiding the three contested EPRs,contingent upon the Board approving the applicants request to have his FA test results removed from his records. e. His effective date...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02557
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His rater did not provide him with a mid-term feedback and there is evidence to support that a personality conflict existed between him and his rater. He asked for feedback and notified his chain-of-command that he was not provided feedback. In the absence of any evidence of unfair treatment or injustice, DPSID finds that the ratings were given fairly and IAW all Air Force policies and procedures.
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 | CY2013 | BC 2013 05449
Her Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) for the period ending 21 Mar 12 be removed from her record. Her EPR for the period ending 2 Feb 13 be removed from her record. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The EPR for the period ending 21 Mar 12 includes a negative comment stating she received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR); however this LOR is not in her Personal Information File (PIF) nor is there any evidence of it in her records.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00061
In support of her requests, the applicant provides copies of her AF Form 910; AF Form 469, Duty Limiting Condition Report; DD Form 2870, Authorization for Disclosure of Medical or Dental Information; Standard Forms (SF) 600, Chronological Record of Medical Care; AF Form 422, Notification of Air Force Member’s Qualification Status, MEB final disposition and other documentation associated with her request. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-02526
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02526 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. Applicant’s EPR profile is listed below: PERIOD ENDING OVERALL EVALUATION *15 May 10 4 15 May 09 5 15 May 08 5 15 May 07 5 15 May 06 5 15 May 05 5 *Referral Report The applicant did not file an appeal with the Evaluation Report Appeals Board...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05244
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05244 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Enlisted Performance Report (EPR), rendered for the reporting period 14 Mar 09 through 13 Mar 10, be declared void and removed from her military personnel records. At the time, there were no provisions that authorized the one- mile walk component...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05389
Furthermore, the applicant did not file an appeal through the Evaluation Reports Appeals Board (ERAB) under the provisions of AFI 36-2401, Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Reports. The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 4 Nov 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). In this respect, we note this Board is the highest administrative level of appeal...