RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03584 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Date of Rank (DOR) to the grade of senior master sergeant (SMSgt-E-8) be corrected to 1 Jan 2011. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: In Dec 2010, he received promotion consideration to the grade of SMSgt, but was denied because his records reflected a failed Fitness Assessment (FA). He was injured and sought medical treatment from the base clinic on or about 29 Sep 2010. At the time, he was recovering from injuries sustained in an automobile accident, which occurred on 1 Mar 2010. He still felt pain in his left knee and the cool weather seemed to intensify the pain level. He had concerns because the pain seemed to get worse after he worked out at the fitness center. He specifically complained about his left knee, however, he also provided a comprehensive history of the vehicle accident he was involved in on 1 Mar 2010. The clinic failed to validate a medical finding regarding his left knee pain; nevertheless, he was given prescription medication. Since he did not receive a physical profile, he was advised by his unit that he had to complete a FA; therefore, he continued to prepare for his FA. On 5 Nov 2010, he experienced an injury while running on an indoor track at the base. He heard a loud "cracking" sound and fell to the floor in severe pain. He went to the clinic on 6 Nov 2010 and reported that he sustained an injury. The clinic seemed unsure about treatment and the doctor stated she did not believe he was injured. She observed both of his knees and stated that she did not see swelling. He was angry at her response and asked for an X-Ray. She reluctantly gave him the referral, but her attitude was very negative. On 9 Nov 2010, he received a call from the radiology department advising him to discontinue running or exercises that may affect his left knee. The original AF Form 469, Duty Limiting Condition Report, never made it through the system because it was erroneously completed for only three days. The document expired before it reached the commander or the Fitness Assessment Cell (FAC). Two significant errors occurred during the process of acquiring a fitness test. First, he was not in status and was not on orders. Secondly, the person responsible for taping did not properly administer the taping process. In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his medical records, AF Form 469, AF Form 422, several memorandums, MRI Results, and his Promotion Order. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is currently serving in the Air Force Reserves in the grade of senior master sergeant (E-8). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibits B and C. ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ USAF/A1PP recommends denial. A1PP states that while the applicant did not specifically request his 16 Dec 2010 FA be removed, his rationale warrants their opinion. The applicant was involved in an automobile accident on 1 Mar 2010 and complained of knee pain as a result of the injuries he sustained. After several medical appointments he was issued an AF Form 422, effective 14 Dec 2010 through 8 Jun 2011 which only cleared him to take the abdominal circumference (AC) portion of the FA. On 16 Dec 2010, he took the FA, but because his waist measured over the minimum to pass an AC only FA, he scored an “Unsatisfactory”. Additionally, he claims the FA monitor erroneously administered this portion of the test by taping him from the right to left hip on the back side and multiplying that measurement by two. A1PP states, the 16 Dec 2010 FA score in the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS) is a valid score. The medical community recognized the applicant’s knee pain by appropriately exempting him from the components that would have negatively affected his score. Additionally, if the member truly felt his AC measurement was erroneously administered, he could have requested his unit commander's approval to immediately re-take the FA with a different monitor. Re-taking the test within just days of the failure, with substantially different results, would have substantiated the member's claim the AC measurement was erroneously administered. The complete A1PP evaluation is at Exhibit B. RMG/CC supports AIPP’s advisory opinion. RMG/CC states, the applicant’s records indicate he was eligible for promotion with a 1 Jan 2011 effective date. On 16 Dec 2010, he failed his FA. His active duty commander, acting within his discretion as the promotion authority, deferred the promotion until he passed his FA. Review of the applicant’s fitness history in the AFFMS, indicates he passed his FA on 26 May 2011. Subsequently, he was promoted to his current rank of senior master sergeant on 1 Jul 2011, after his active duty commander approved his promotion. With regards to changing his effective date of promotion to 1 Jan 2011, the documentation provided does not justify or warrant a change to his records. Had the member passed his FA in Dec 2010, he would have been promoted effective 1 Jan 2011. The complete RMG/CC evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 29 Feb 2012 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. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices 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. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issue(s) involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. ________________________________________________________________ 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 this application in Executive Session on 19 Apr 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket number BC- BC-2011-03584 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 7 Jul 2011, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, HQ USAF/A1PP, dated 20 Jan 2012. Exhibit D. Letter, RMG/CC, dated 22 Feb 2012. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Feb 2012. Panel Chair