RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03455
XXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. The Fitness Assessments (FAs), dated 18 Jun 10, 25 Mar 11, 20 Jun 11, and 26 Mar 12 be removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS).
2. The resulting demotion be rescinded and his grade be restored to master sergeant (E-7).
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The FAs and resulting demotion, were unjust due to a pre-existing medical condition, Fibromyalgia, which precluded him from attaining a passing score on the assessments.
Between 2007 and 2012, he scheduled four doctor appointments due to feelings of extreme pain, fatigue, and weakness; which was causing his FA failures. However, he was misdiagnosed at the time as having no physical ailments. In Oct 12, a narrative summary of his medical history, signed by his medical provider indicated that he did in fact have a medical condition. Since his diagnosis, he has been exempted from components of the FA that are affected by Fibromyalgia and has not failed the FA.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently serving as a technical sergeant (E-6) in the Regular Air Force.
On 18 Jun 10, 25 Mar 11, 20 Jun 11 and 26 Mar 12 the applicant completed the contested FAs with unsatisfactory composite scores of 69.55, 64.10, 65.50 and 73.00, respectively.
The applicant received a referral EPR for period 2 Dec 11 through 22 Jun 12 based on a rating of "Does Not Meet" in Section 3, Fitness.
On 25 Apr 12, the applicant received notification of demotion action under AFI 36-2502, Failure to Keep Fit, paragraph 6.3.5, due to four fitness assessment failures within a 24-month period. The demotion authority agreed with the commander's recommendation and directed the applicant be demoted to the grade of TSgt effective 4 Jun 12.
A narrative summary of his medical condition from his medical providers, dated 28 Mar 13 indicates that he was diagnosed with deconditioning, fibromyalgia/insomnia/fatigue.
On 17 Dec 13, a similar request was considered and denied by the Fitness Assessment Appeals Board (FAAB), due to insufficient evidence; specifically, an AF Form 422 and medical documents to support how the injury effected his ability to pass the FAs.
_____________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial of the relief sought to remove the FAs dated, 25 Mar 11, 20 Jun 11, and 26 Mar 12, due to lack of supporting evidence. However, recommend removing FA dated 18 Jun 10, based on the fact that this was before the implementation of AFI 36-2905 (AFGM2), dated 20 Dec 10, giving Unit Commanders the authority to invalidate FAs. Although the applicant provided a memorandum from his medical provider stating that he had a medical condition that precluded him from achieving a passing score, there is nothing indicating what the limitations were at that time.
Complete copies of the Air Force evaluations, with attachments, are at Exhibits C and F.
AFPC/DPSOE defers the recommendation of DPSIM regarding the removal of the failed fitness assessments. In reference to the demotion action taken against the applicant, it was procedurally correct and there is no evidence there were any irregularities or that the case was mishandled in any way. The commander acted within his authority to demote the applicant from MSgt to TSgt for his failure to maintain fitness standards in accordance with AFI 36-2502. Moreover, even with the recommended removal of the 18 Jun 10 FA, the commanders decision to demote based on the remaining three FA failures remains valid.
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluations, with attachments, is at Exhibit D.
_______________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations, with attachments, were forwarded to the applicant on 4 Mar 14 and 12 May 14 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibits E and G).
________________________________________________________________
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. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the applicants contentions, we are not persuaded that a pre-existing medical condition precluded him from attaining a passing score on the contested FAs. In this respect, we note the narrative summary of his medical history indicates he has been treated for medical conditions, some of which currently warrant profile restrictions; however, there is no indication any of them contributed to the contested FA failures. DPSIM recommends removing of the 18 Jun 10 FA, since the FA was administered before the implementation of AFI 36-2905 (AFGM2), dated 20 Dec 10, giving Unit Commanders the authority to invalidate FAs. However, based on the evidence before us and in the absence of support from the Unit Commander, we find no basis upon which to recommend such action. We also find no basis to disturb the decision of the demotion authority, who agreed with the commander's recommendation to demote the applicant, based on four FA failures within a 24-month period. We find the commanders recommendation was justified based on the applicants failure to maintain physical standards and find no evidence the demotion authority acted improperly or exceeded her authority. Therefore, in view of the above and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling 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-2013-03455 in Executive Session on 19 August 2014, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
XXXXXXXXXXXXX, XXX Chair
XXXXXXXXXXXXX, Member
XXXXXXXXXXXXX, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-03455:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 116 Jul 13, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Extracts from Military Master Personnel Record.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 27 Nov 13, w/atch.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 15 Jan 14.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Mar 14.
Exhibit F. Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 24 Apr 14.
Exhibit G. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 May 14.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04179
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial of his request to have his FA dated 20 Jun 12, removed from AFFMS indicating the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence to support his claim. The complete DPSIM evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial of the applicants request to remove the demotion action and restore his rank to SrA. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 13 Jun 14.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02515
In paragraph 6.1.6, it states if the demotion authority restores the airman's original grade following the demotion, he or she must do so between three and six months after the effective date of the demotion. Based on the available evidence, which includes statements from the applicant's current commander and first sergeant, medical records, FA history since 2004, and the demotion action file; the demotion action was procedurally correct and there is no evidence that the applicant's...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04345
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial of the applicants request to remove the demotion action and restore his rank to Technical Sergeant. Therefore, in view of the fact that we have determined the evidence is sufficient to conclude there was a causal nexus between the medical condition for which the applicant received a disability discharged and his ability to attain passing scores on his FAs, we also believe it is reasonable to conclude...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04035 (2)
In a letter dated 22 Oct 13, the demotion authority reinstated his grade to SSgt with his original Date of Rank (DOR) of 9 Jan 13. As such, if the applicant wants to make a request to remove the referral EPRs, he must first exhaust all available avenues of administrative relief provided by existing law or regulations, such as the Evaluation Report Appeals Board (ERAB) prior to seeking relief before this Board, as required by the governing Air Force Instruction. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00694
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00694 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His demotion from the grade of Technical Sergeant (TSgt/E-6) to the grade of Staff Sergeant (SSgt/E-5) be rescinded. The applicants most recent FA results are as follows: Date Composite Score Rating 4 Apr 13 87.25 Satisfactory 21 Jun...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00197
The applicant has not provided documentation from his unit commander or primary care manager for invalidating the FA, nor did he provide the specific FA failure. The applicant held the grade of SSgt on the date of his retirement; therefore, his record correctly reflects his retired grade as SSgt. On 11 Dec 13, the Secretary of the Air Force found the applicant served satisfactorily in the grade of TSgt and ordered his advancement to the grade of TSgt when his time on active duty and his...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03222
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant provided a memorandum dated 28 Mar 14 from her commander expressing his support to have the 28 Aug 12 FA removed from her records. The applicant contends that her medical conditions unfairly precluded her from attaining a passing score on her 17 Dec 10, 11 Feb 11, 6 May 11, and 28 Aug 12...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01519
He be provided the E-5 back-pay from the date of his 15 May 13 demotion date. The narrative reason for his retirement was Temporary Early Retirement Authority. 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 and D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial due to lack of supporting evidence (i.e. medical validation, commander's invalidation...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01123
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility which are included at Exhibits C, D, and E. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of the applicant’s request to...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00540
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00540 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Fitness Assessment (FA) scores, dated 16 Jun 10, 23 Sep 10, 17 Dec 10, 25 Mar 11, 3 Jul 12, and 1 Oct 12, be removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS). The applicant completed 36 sit-ups; however, the passing minimum score for...