RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05244
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her Enlisted Performance Report (EPR), rendered for the
reporting period 14 Mar 09 through 13 Mar 10, be declared void
and removed from her military personnel records.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She was erroneously administered the one-mile walk test prior to
the implementation of AFI 36-2905, Fitness Program, when the
provisions of AFI 10-248, Fitness Program, were still in effect.
As a result, she received a referral EPR.
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 staff sergeant (E-5).
On 19 Feb 10, the applicant participated in the contested FA
that consisted of a one-mile walk for the cardio component of
the assessment, in which she did not attain a passing score.
At the time, there were no provisions that authorized the one-
mile walk component prior to the implementation of AFI 36-2905,
Fitness Program, dated 1 Jul 10.
On 3 Dec 12, AFPC/DPSIM notified the applicant that her FA,
dated 19 Feb 10, had been administratively removed from the
AFFMS.
?
The following is a resume of her EPR ratings:
RATING PERIOD PROMOTION RECOMMENDATION
13 Mar 13 5
13 Mar 12 5
13 Mar 11 5
* 13 Mar 10 4 (referral)
13 Mar 09 5
15 Jun 08 5
11 Dec 07 (SSgt) 5
11 Dec 06 5
11 Dec 05 (SrA) 5
13 Feb 04 5
13 Feb 03 (A1C) 5
* Contested Report
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSID recommends approval of the applicants request to
void the contested report based on the recommendation from the
subject matter expert and the removal of the 19 Feb 10 FA from
the AFFMS. The applicant alleges that the FA failure was a
direct result of her being tested under the wrong cardio
component of the one-mile walk. She contends that she should
have been tested under the cardio component of the three-mile
walk. The applicant provided a memorandum from her commander as
well as the Fitness Assessment Cell (FAC) Staff, recommending
that the contested fitness failure be removed from the AFFMS.
The applicant also provided an email from the Inspector
Generals Office who verified with USAF/A1PPP that the one-mile
walk was not authorized to be conducted until 1 Jul 10 and, as a
result, made the 19 Feb 10 assessment invalid.
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit D.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant on 1 Mar 13 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. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. The
applicant contends that she was erroneously administered the
one-mile walk test prior to the implementation of AFI 36-2905,
Fitness Program, which led to her fitness failure and resulted
in her receiving a referral EPR. After a thorough review of the
evidence of record and the applicants complete submission, we
believe a preponderance of the evidence supports corrective
action. In this respect, we note the comments of the Air Force
OPR indicating that relief should be granted and the contested
EPR be removed from her records. In view of the above, we also
believe it would be appropriate to recommend the applicant be
provided supplemental promotion consideration for all cycles
where the contested EPR was a matter of record. Therefore, we
recommend the applicants records be corrected as indicated
below.
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show the
following:
a. The AF Form 910, Enlisted Performance Report (AB thru
TSgt), rendered for the period 14 March 2009 through 13 March
2010 be declared void and removed from her records.
b. She be provided supplemental promotion consideration for
all cycles where this report was a matter of record.
________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2012-05244 in Executive Session on 18 Jul 13 under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
?
All members voted to correct the records as recommended. The
following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 8 Nov 12, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 19 Feb 13.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Mar 13.
Panel Chair
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 | 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 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 | CY2011 | BC-2011-05042
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which are attached at Exhibit C and D. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends the AFBCMR approve the applicants request to void the contested report. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 03485
Furthermore, because the failed FAs resulted in the applicant receiving a referral EPR and cancellation of his promotion, to the grade of technical sergeant, we recommend the referral EPR for the period of 29 Feb 2012 to 11 Jul 2012 be declared void and removed from his records and that his promotion to the grade of technical sergeant be reinstated with a date of rank and effective date of 1 Sep 2012. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 19 Sep 2013. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 29...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01145
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01145 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of the applicants request to void the contested EPR indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial of the applicants request to remove the contested FA...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02775
________________________________________________________________ On 7 Jan 14, the Fitness Assessment Appeals Board (FAAB) disapproved the applicants request for removal of his failed FAs from the AFFMS stating that he should have tested within the limits of his profile. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial of the request for removal of the failed FAs dated 4 Apr 11 and 14 Nov 11 due to the lack of supporting...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01534
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends updating the push-up component of the applicants fitness assessment to reflect exempt in AFFMS; which would change her overall composite score to 88.33 (Satisfactory). The complete DPSIM evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit B. AFPC/DPSID recommends approval of the applicants request to remove her contested EPR. The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02474
His Fitness Assessment (FA) dated 10 Apr 12, be removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS). The complete DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPSID states based on the recommendation from DPSIM to only exempt the cardio portion of the applicants FA test and not remove the entire 10 Apr 12 FA, they recommend the AFBCMR deny the applicants request to void the contested EPR. ________________________________________________________________ _ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05833
After the FA the applicant visited his medical provider and was given a corrected profile. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial of the applicants request to void/remove the FA dated 25 Jan 13. While the AFI does state that a member who is using albuterol medication should be exempt on the walk component, the applicant did not provide justification that would prove he was taking the medication at the time of his...