RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03443
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His referral AF Form 910, Enlisted Performance Report (AB thru
TSGT), rendered for the period 4 Dec 09 thru 3 Dec 10 be voided
and his line number to staff sergeant (SSgt) for cycle 10E5 be
reinstated.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The letter of reprimand (LOR) and referral EPR he received are
not the norm in the Air Force for first time fitness assessment
(FA) failures.
His rater was advised by the squadron superintendent that the
referral enlisted performance report (EPR) he was preparing
would not result in losing his line number to SSgt.
He wore the SSgt stripe for a month and when he did not notice a
change in his pay he contacted finance. Finance instructed him
to contact the promotions section at the military personnel
flight (MPF) for further guidance.
The MPF advised him his line number was red lined in Dec 10 due
to the referral EPR he received for FA failure.
He was never informed of the action and wore the SSgt stripes
for one month. After being told to remove the stripes, he
suffered the embarrassment and the expense of their replacement.
The system failed him by not informing him of such personnel
actions.
In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his
referral EPR, Air Force Fitness Management history, Referral
memorandum and his acknowledgement, and electronic communiqué
from the 86 CPTS/Finance Customer Service.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air Force in
the grade of senior airman.
The following is a resume of his performance reports:
Close Out Date Overall Rating
3 Dec 07 5
3 Dec 08 5
3 Dec 09 5
+ 3 Dec 10 4
3 Oct 11 5
+ Contested Report
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application,
extracted from the applicants military records, are contained
in the letter prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air
Force at Exhibits C and D.
________________________________________________________________
THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPSID recommends denial. DPSID states the applicant did
not provide any evidence the evaluation was unjust or inaccurate
as rendered.
The applicant did not file an appeal under the provisions of AFI
36-2406, Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Systems, and AFI 36-
2401, Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Reports.
The applicants belief that a referral EPR for a first-time FA
failure is not the norm in the Air Force is incorrect. DPSID
clarifies receiving a referral EPR is the norm when the
evaluation closes out and an airman has either not passed the FA
or has not completed the FA before the close-out of the
evaluation.
The applicant failed the FA almost five months before the close-
out of the evaluation in question and had over four months from
the time of his FA failure to overcome the deficiency.
According to AFI 36-2905, Air Force Fitness Program, airmen are
required to maintain fitness standards 365 days a year.
Additionally, DPSID states the applicants responsibility to
maintain fitness standards are clearly explained in the
Professional Development Guide.
According to AFI 36-2905, airman must test within 90 days of a
failed FA. The applicant did not re-test within that time
period and did not provide documentation that might prove a
medical condition or some other factor that prevented him from
taking the FA in a timely manner.
The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C.
HQ AFPC/DPSOE defers to DPSIDs recommendation regarding the
removal of the applicants EPR.
The applicant was considered and tentatively selected for
promotion to SSgt during cycle 10E5. He received a promotion
sequence number (PSN) 8991.0 which would have incremented on
1 May 11; however, receipt of the referral EPR rendered him
ineligible for promotion in accordance with AFI 36-2502, Airman
Promotion/Demotion Programs, Table 1.1, Rule 22. His line
number to SSgt was subsequently removed.
The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit D.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the
applicant on 29 Dec 11 for review and comment within 30 days.
As of this date, no response has been received by this office
(Exhibit E).
________________________________________________________________
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 opinion and recommendation
of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its
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.
________________________________________________________________
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 28 Feb 12, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-
2011-03443:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 8 Jun 11, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 17 Nov 11.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 21 Dec 11.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Dec 11.
Panel Chair
4
4
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03248
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicants military records are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibits C, and D. ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of the applicant's request to change or void the contested EPR. DPSID states the applicant did not file an appeal through the Evaluation Report Appeals Board...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-00021
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibits C, D, E, and G. ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial of the applicant’s request to remove his 19 Feb 2010 FA from the AFFMS. DPSIM states the applicant is requesting his FA dated 19 Feb 2010 be removed from the AFFMS. The complete DPSID evaluation, with...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04301
________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial of the applicants request to have her 17 October 2011 FA removed from AFFMS. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 14 May 2013 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02502
His records be corrected to show that he is now and was promotion eligible during the time he was placed on a Control Roster. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B. AFPC/DPSOA recommends closing the case, since the applicant's record currently reflects his requested actions and they do not have the history, nor are they the OPR for control roster actions; however, based on the information provided the previous RE code 4I would have been a result of...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02171
On 30 Jun 12, the applicant provided a response to the contested referral EPR indicating he made an honest attempt to pass the contested FA; however, he realized that due to his hip pain and past injuries (having had an AF Form 422, Notification of Air Force Members Qualification Status requiring he only accomplish the walk assessment in Sept of 11), he should have sought medical attention prior to the FA. He reiterated that his contested FA failure was the result of his medical...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04096
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandums prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C, D, and E. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends approval of the applicants request to remove the 21 Oct 10 and 21 Dec 10 FAs from her records. Based on the documentation provided by the applicant, it is determined that the applicant was pregnant at the time the FAs were administered on 21 Oct...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01916
His referral Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) rendered for the period 21 Sep 2010 through 20 Aug 2011, be voided from his records. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibits D and E. ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial of the applicants request to void his referral EPR. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03538
On 15 Feb 13, he was given a AF Form 422, Notification of Air Force Qualification Status, which incorrectly authorized him to complete push-ups and sit-ups during FA testing, resulting in failure of his 28 Feb 13 FA because he only completed 10 push-ups. The applicant did not provide the Army version of the profile that was given to him, nor did he provide the original profile that should have been dated and signed by the Medical Provider on or about 15 Feb 13. While the Board notes the...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00365
Her referral 4 EPR was rendered as a result of the contested FA failures and should therefore also be removed from her records. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit E. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 20 May 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit F). The applicant contends that because she had a medical condition that unfairly precluded her from attaining passing fitness...
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...