RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00530
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. His Fitness Assessments (FA), dated 3 Jun 10, 31 Aug 10, and 31 Jan 13, be declared void and removed from his record in the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS).
2. His AF Form 910, Enlisted Performance Report (EPR), rendered for the period of 7 Aug 09 through 6 Aug 10, be replaced.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He had an undiagnosed medical condition that unfairly impacted his ability to perform the cardio component of his FA. As a result, he received a referral EPR. His EPR should be replaced due to this medical diagnosis, which was not known at the time of the report inclusive period.
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 (TSgt).
On 3 Jun 10, the applicant participated in one of the contested FAs where he attained an overall composite score of 63.75 points, which constituted an unsatisfactory rating.
On 6 Aug 10, the contested EPR was referred to the applicant due to a does not meet standards rating in Block 3, Fitness, and a comment related to his failure of the aforementioned FA.
On 31 Aug 10, the applicant participated in one of the contested FAs where he attained an overall composite score of 52.30 points, which constituted an unsatisfactory rating.
On 31 Jan 13, the applicant participated in one of the contested FAs where he attained an overall composite score of 33.50 points, which constituted an unsatisfactory rating
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIDE recommends denial indicating the applicant has not exhausted all available avenues of administrative relief prior to seeking correction of his military record. The applicant should submit an AF Form 948, Application for Correction/Removal of Evaluation Reports, with all required supporting documentation, through the virtual Military Personnel Flight (vMPF) Evaluation Appeals. The memorandum will need to address any content or rating changes between reports and the reason for the change(s), which details the error and the need for correction to the contested EPR. If the administrative appeal is not successful, the applicant may resubmit the DD Form 149, Application for Correction of Military Records, and the results of the ERAB administrative review.
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIDE evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial indicating the applicant has not exhausted all available avenues of administrative relief prior to seeking correction of his military record through the BCMR. In accordance with Air Force Instruction 36-2905, dated 21 Oct 13, any military member can appeal his/her FA via Wing Appeal and subsequently through the AF Fitness Assessment Appeals Board (FAAB), within two years of discovering an error/injustice. The applicants DD Form 149 was signed after 21 Oct 13 and the appeal has not been considered by his Wing commander, nor has it been reviewed by the FAAB; therefore, the applicants request has not been submitted IAW current Air Force guidance.
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit D.
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 17 Nov 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). As of this date, no response has been received by this office.
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. In this respect, we note this Board is the highest administrative level of appeal within the Air Force. As such, an applicant must first exhaust all available avenues of administrative relief provided by existing law or regulations prior to seeking relief before this Board, as required by the governing Air Force Instruction. To request the removal of the contested fitness assessment (FA) or enlisted performance report (EPR), there are other available avenues of administrative relief the applicant has not first pursued. The applicant should have applied to the Fitness Assessment Appeals Board (FAB) and Evaluation Report Appeals Board (ERAB) for relief on these issues prior to applying to the BCMR. In view of this, we find this application is not ripe for adjudication at this level, as there are subordinate levels of appeal that have not first been depleted. Therefore, in view of the above, we find no 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-2014-00530 in Executive Session on 18 Dec 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 17 Jan 14, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSID, dated 31 Aug 14.
Exhibit D. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 21 Oct 14.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Nov 14.
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 | 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 04468
Finally, the applicant did not provide any additional supporting documentation to consider, i.e., commanders invalidation, AF Form 422, etc. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial of the applicants request to void and remove the FAs dated 22 Feb 11, 1 Mar 11, and 22 Jun 11. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM and AFPC/DPSIDE evaluations is at Exhibit B and Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant...
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 | 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 | CY2011 | BC-2011-04664
The complete AFPC/DPSIDE evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: His chronic medical condition affected his Physical Training (PT). The applicant contends his chronic back pain precluded him from passing four fitness assessments (FA) and ultimately resulted in him receiving the contested referral enlisted performance report (EPR). While the applicant has provided a supporting statement from...
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 | CY2013 | BC 2013 01186
A complete copy of the BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation is at Exhibit F. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations and the BCMR Medical Consultant evaluation were forwarded to the applicant on 19 Jul 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit G). Furthermore, in view of the fact the applicant was furnished two letters of reprimand (LOR) and a referral enlisted performance report (EPR) as a direct result of the contested FAs, the majority...
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 | CY2013 | BC 2013 02880
In a letter dated 7 Apr 14, the applicants Primary Care Manager (PCM) stated that it was evident that the Synthroid regimen was being adjusted when the applicant failed her now one remaining FA failure on the AC measure. The complete FAAB evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B. AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of the applicants request for removal of her referral EPR for the period through 16 Jun 11. In this respect, we note the applicant provides a letter dated 7 Apr 14, from her PCM...