RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04024
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. His fitness assessment test dated 3 March 2011 be removed.
2. The rating on his Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) with the
close-out date of 10 March 2011 be restored to 5.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He had 2 disc osteophyte (herniated) along the posterior endplates
from C4 to C6. His doctor determined that a fusion was necessary
and he had surgery on 10 March 2010. Due to a misinterpretation
of the medical notes from the surgery that was performed at an
Army hospital, the AF Form 469, Duty Limiting Report, and the AF
Form 422, Notification of Air Force Members Qualification Status,
exempting him from all components of the Physical Fitness test
were incorrectly completed at the Holloman clinic. He was
required to test based on incorrect information. As a result, he
failed his fitness test and received a referral EPR.
In support of his request, the applicant provides a personal
statement, a copy of the contested EPR, the DD Form 422, the DD
Form 469, a supporting statement from his rater and excerpts of
his medical records.
The applicants 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 technical sergeant (E-6).
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are
contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of
the Air Force which are at Exhibits B through D.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
USAF/A1PP recommends denial. The AF Form 469 issued on
18 February 2011 did not prohibit the applicant from performing
exercises. He was permitted to walk, cycle, swim, use the
elliptical, underwater treadmill, aqua jogger belt and strength
train with a weight limit of 20 pounds. These exercises along
with a balanced diet would have helped the member truly achieve a
waist measurement small enough to pass the abdominal circumference
of the fitness assessment. Had the member felt the AF Form 422
issued on 23 February 2011 did not reflect the treating
physicians recommendation for the fitness assessment, he should
have addressed the matter prior to taking the fitness assessment.
The complete USAF/A1PP evaluation is at Exhibit B.
AFPC/DPSID recommends denial. The applicant did not file an
appeal through the Evaluation Reports Appeals Board.
An advisory opinion prepared by USAF/A1PP recommends denial of
the applicants request. Based on this recommendation, the
referral fitness comment as well as the Does Not Meet marking
in section III, Block 3 is valid and appropriate as recorded on
the contested evaluation and in accordance with all applicable
Air Force policies and procedures.
The applicant may feel this is an injustice; however, there are
avenues to ensure that any medical issues are taken into
consideration, not by the rating chain, but with the proper
authorities within the medical community. To change or void
this EPR would be an injustice to other Airmen who consulted
with the medical community and received proper medical profiles
regarding the fitness program or the other Airmen who have met
the regulatory Air Force requirements.
The complete AFPC/DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPSOE defers recommendation to USAF/A1PP and AFPC/DPSID.
The first time the contested report would have been considered
for promotion was during cycle 11E7, however, the referral EPR
rendered him ineligible for promotion consideration. Should the
Board remove the report, the applicant would receive
supplemental promotion consideration beginning with cycle 11E7.
The complete AFPC/DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the
applicant on 23 March 2012, for review and comment within
30 days (Exhibit E). As of this date, this office has received
no response.
_________________________________________________________________
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 an injustice. We took notice of the
applicants complete submission in judging the merits of this
case. However, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of
the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their
rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has
not been the victim of an error or injustice. In the absence of
evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend
granting the relief sought in this application.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS 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 AFBCMR Docket Number
BC-2011-04024 in Executive Session on 17 May 2012 under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 7 Oct 11, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, USAF/A1PP, dated 26 Jan 12.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 13 Feb 12.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 15 Mar 12.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Mar 12.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00240
His fitness assessments dated 29 December 2010, 9 March 2011, and 16 August 2011 be removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS). The complete 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 17 July 2102, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit F). After a thorough review of the evidence presented, we...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00324
On or about 18 March 2011, the applicant requested a two-week extension of the close-out date of the contested report to include a successful fitness assessment. On 24 November 2013, the Fitness Assessment Appeals Board voided the Fitness Assessments, dated 26 August 2004, 21 July 2005, 21 February 2006, 4 April 2008 and 14 October 2009, and they have been removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System. Moreover, we also recognize that she would have been able to successfully...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02102
After a thorough review of the available records, the majority of the Board found no evidence that the applicants referral EPR is unjust or inaccurate. In accordance with Air Force Instruction 36- 2502, table 1.1, Rule 22, receipt of a referral report renders a member ineligible for promotion; therefore, a majority of the Board recommends denying her request to reinstate her line number for promotion to technical sergeant. ...
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 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 | CY2011 | BC-2011-01398
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility, which are attached at Exhibits C and D. ________________________________________________________________ _ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of the applicants request to change or remove her EPR. While it appears the applicant performed [her duties] extremely well during the reporting period, the failed fitness...
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 | CY2012 | BC-2012-00554
AFPC/DPSIM recommended the fitness assessment dated 22 February 2011 be removed. Should the Board deem the fitness assessments date 1 June 2011 and 31 August 2011 invalid and direct the EPR be changed from a referral to a non-referral, the applicant will be entitled to supplemental promotion consideration beginning with cycle 12E6, once tested. The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...
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 | CY2013 | BC 2013 04469
On 14 Feb 14, the Fitness Assessment Appeals Board (FAAB) directed that the applicants pertinent AFFMS records be updated to reflect the FAs dated 14 Dec 10, 2 Sep 11, and 1 Dec 11 be removed. The applicant provided medical documentation supporting his contention that his condition precluded him from attaining passing scores on the contested FAs and also provided two substitute reports signed by all of the original evaluators with memorandums supporting his request to substitute the...