RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05857
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her referral Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) covering the period 15 Nov 11 through 31 Aug 12 be removed from her record.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
This was a mere oversight. She submitted a rebuttal to the referral EPR and after reviewing her rebuttal both the Additional Rater and Reviewer non-concurred with her rater. The referral EPR should not have made it into her record.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant served in the Air National Guard in the grade of Master Sergeant (MSgt) during the period of time in question.
On 27 Sep 12, the applicant received a referral EPR covering the period 15 Nov 11 through 31 Aug 12, on which she received an overall performance assessment of 3 (Average). Both the Additional Rater and the Reviewer non-concurred with this rating.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
NGB/A1PP recommends denial because the applicant has not exhausted her administrative remedies. The applicant states that her referral EPR, should not have made it to administrative personnel after the Additional Rater and Reviewer non-concurred with the unjust rating. In accordance with AFI 36-2406, Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Systems, Chapter 10, corrections to EPRs must be submitted through the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB). The member must petition the ERAB to review her evaluation and determine whether or not her contentions are justified before applying to the AFBCMR.
A complete copy of the NGB/A1PP 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 21 Jul 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, no response has been received by this office.
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The application was timely filed.
2. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. In this respect, we note this Board is the highest administrative level of appeal within the Air Force. As such, an applicant must first exhaust all available avenues of administrative relief provided by existing law or regulations prior to seeking relief before this Board, as required by the governing Air Force Instruction. To request the removal of an EPR, there is an available avenue of administrative relief the applicant has not first pursued. The applicant should have applied to the ERAB prior to applying to the BCMR. In view of this, we find this application is not ready for adjudication at this level, as there exists a subordinate level of appeal that has not first been depleted. Therefore, in view of the above, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified she has not exhausted all available avenues of administrative relief prior to submitting this application to the BCMR; and the application will only be reconsidered upon exhausting all subordinate avenues of administrative relief.
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-05857 in Executive Session on 13 Nov 14 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Panel Chair
Member
Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Dec 13, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, NGB/A1PP, dated 28 Jan 14.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Jul 14.
3
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
4
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04760
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04760 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Enlisted Performance Report (EPR), rendered for the period 22 Jun 10 through 18 Nov 10, be removed from his records and replaced with an existing Letter of Evaluation (LOE) for the same period. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04596
THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIDE recommends the applicant submit an AF Form 948, Application for Correction/Removal of Evaluation Reports, with all required supporting documentation, through the vMPF Evaluation Appeals, as he has not exhausted his administrative remedies, prior to seeking relief from the Board. The first avenue of relief is through the Evaluation Report Appeals Board (ERAB). Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIDE, dated 17 April 2014.
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 | CY2013 | BC 2013 05594
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIDE recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIDE 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 21 Jul 14 for...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00174
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00174 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) with a close out date of 2 Jun 11 be voided. The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. In further support of her request the applicant provides a letter from her former deputy commander stating that based on the AFBMCRs decision that the previous...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02279
The complete A1PP evaluation is at Exhibit B. AFPC/DPSOE states, should the Board remove the three fitness failures from the applicants record, DPSOE recommends revoking the demotion orders and restoring the applicants rank to staff sergeant. The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states at this time he does not have any additional evidence in support of his...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05761
In Accordance With (IAW) AFI 36-2905, Fitness Program, dated 21 Oct 13, any military member can appeal their FA through a wing-level appeals board and then through the AFPC Fitness Assessment Appeals Board (FAAB) within two years of discovering the error/injustice. The applicant did not file an appeal through the Evaluation Report Appeals Board (ERAB) under the provisions of AFI 36-2406, Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Systems. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Oct 14.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05285
According to Mil Form 88, Record of Proceedings under Article 15, WCMJ, on 17 June 2010, the Assistant Adjutant General imposed nonjudicial punishment on the applicant who was reduced from the rank of MSgt to the rank of SSgt effective 17 June 2010. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In a memorandum dated 6 January 2014, NGB/A1PP recommends correcting the applicants records to reflect his retirement rank as TSgt. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air...
Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A. On 30 Sep 99, applicant’s supervisor did not recommend her for reenlistment due to the referral EPR. A complete copy of the their evaluation, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and provided a five-page letter responding to the advisory opinions.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04901
Therefore, the referral EPR itself should be removed from his record. The applicant contends that because pages of his rebuttal to the contested referral enlisted performance report (EPR) are missing, he is the victim of an injustice and the contested EPR should therefore be removed. Furthermore, while we note the comments of the Air Force OPR indicating that this Board should direct that the missing pages be added to his record, we are not convinced that the evidence provided by the...