Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01890
Original file (BC 2014 01890.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01890

					COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) rendered for the period 
2 Jul 11 – 1 Jul 12 be removed or changed.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She questioned her rating of a “4” while stationed at her last 
base; she spoke with her supervisor and his rater about it and 
thought everything would be taken care of; however, upon arriving 
at her new duty station she found out that her report had become a 
matter of record with the same rating and without her signature.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at 
Exhibit A.


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant, while serving at Incirlik Air Base in the grade of 
Staff Sergeant (SSgt-E/5), received an EPR closing on 1 Jul 12.  
The report was digitally signed and dated, by the rater and 
additional rater, on 1 Aug 12.


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIDE recommends denial indicating the applicant has not 
exhausted all available avenues of administrative relief prior to 
seeking correction of her military records.  

Under the provisions of AFI 36-2603, Air Force Board for 
Correction of Military Records, the request for correction of 
military records, DD Form 149, Application for Correction of 
Military Records under the Provisions of Title 10, USC, Section 
1552, has been examined at this Center.  Air Force Board for 
Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) is the highest level of 
administrative appeal within the Department of the Air Force. The 
AFBCMR will not consider a case until all avenues of 
administrative relief have been exhausted.  We recommend the 
applicant submit a new AF Form 948, Application for 
Correction/Removal of Evaluation Reports, with all required 
supporting documentation, through the vMPF/Evaluation Appeals 
found under the Most Popular Applications.

The application was forwarded to the Evaluation Report Appeals 
Board (ERAB) for their review and they determined to return the 
request without action, pending additional supporting 
documentation and evidence of the error or injustice.  If the 
applicant wishes to void the contested report, the applicant must 
provide factual, specific, and substantiated information that is 
from credible officials or agencies and is based on firsthand 
observation.  The applicant will need to provide any and all 
supporting documentation, such as, but not limited to wet-signed 
statements from the original rating chain that wrote the report or 
unit leadership that would support the claims that the report the 
applicant is contesting is either unjust or inaccurate.  
Evaluators are obliged to consider such incidents, their 
significance, and the frequency with which they occurred in 
assessing performance and potential.  

Moreover, AFI 36-2406, Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Systems, 
paragraph 10.2.1.3., states the ERAB works under the assumption 
that evaluation reports are accurate and objective.  Therefore, 
the applicant must provide strong evidence to overcome the 
report's presumed validity.  Additionally, paragraphs A2.2 and 
A2.3, states, when documenting the appeal, the applicant must 
provide convincing documentation for the appeal; the applicant 
must offer clear evidence that the original evaluation was unjust 
or wrong; and quality, not quantity of documentation is the issue.  
The most effective evidence consists of statements from the 
original evaluators who signed the report or from other 
individuals in the rating chain when the report was signed.  As an 
alternative, the applicant can use support statements from other 
credible sources or reviewing agencies (such as the IG, EOT, CDI, 
etc.) that have firsthand knowledge of the allegations and can 
validate/confirm any perceived error/injustice.  The applicant 
must substantiate any injustice(s) on the contested report and 
provide sufficient supporting documentation to validate/confirm 
any of the claims.  The applicant must prove the report was not 
rendered in good faith by all evaluators based on knowledge 
available at the time.  Furthermore, the applicant must supply 
specific information about the unfair evaluation for the board to 
make a reasoned judgment on the appeal and show strong evidence to 
the board when requesting to remove a report from the permanent 
record.

The complete 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 2 Oct 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 applicant has not 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.  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.  The 
Air Force office of primary responsibility has reviewed this 
application and indicated there is an available avenue of 
administrative relief the applicant has not first pursued.  In 
view of this, we find this application is not ripe 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 basis to recommend granting the relief 
sought in this application.


THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2014-01890 in Executive Session on 11 Mar 15 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member



The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-01890 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 13 Mar 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Pertinent Excerpts from Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIDE, dated 4 Jul 14.
Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 Oct 14.







Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03088

    Original file (BC 2014 03088.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. The Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) is the highest level of administrative appeal within the Department of the Air Force. In accordance with AFI 36-2401,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04040

    Original file (BC 2013 04040.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIDE recommends denial noting the applicant has not exhausted all available avenues of administrative relief. The Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) is the highest level of administrative appeal within the Department of the Air Force. The Air Force Office of Primary Responsibility (OPR) has reviewed this application and noted the applicant has not filed an appeal through...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01821

    Original file (BC 2014 01821.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01821 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His performance report rendered for the period 1 Apr 12 – 31 Mar 13 be replaced with a revised report. In addition, since the changes being requested is not considered minor corrections to the existing OPR on file, the applicant will need to include a wet- signed supporting memorandum from additional rater in the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04596

    Original file (BC 2013 04596.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2014 | BC 2014 01473

    Original file (BC 2014 01473.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant has not exhausted all administrative avenues of relief by first filing an appeal through the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB) under the provisions of AFI 36-2406. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPDIDE evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In response, the applicant reiterates that she would like the EPR replaced in her official military record because of the verbiage used in the report. We note the comments of the Air Force office of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01134

    Original file (BC 2014 01134.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB) has substantiated that an error or injustice occurred but will not remove the EPR without a new report being accomplished. 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 the applicant has not exhausted all available avenues of administrative...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00936

    Original file (BC 2014 00936.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00936 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her AF Form 707, Officer Performance Report (OPR) (Lt thru Col) rendered for the period 15 Mar 12 through 15 Feb 13, be removed from her official record. 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00711

    Original file (BC 2014 00711.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 as the applicant has not exhausted all available avenues of administrative relief. 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00407

    Original file (BC 2014 00407.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 the applicant has not exhausted all available avenues of administrative relief prior to seeking correction of her military record. The change the applicant is requesting is not for minor corrections, so she will need to provide a memorandum...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01890

    Original file (BC-2005-01890.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPP recommends the application be denied. DPPP states that applications based on the fact that the ratee and his evaluators were geographically separated, or working on a different shift, require conclusive documentation show they had no valid basis on which to assess performance. Additionally, we note that the rater on the contested report was in the applicant’s rating chain on the preceding...