RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2014-01744

	 	COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be reinstated to the grade of technical sergeant (E-6).  


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He satisfactorily held the grade of E-6 for three years prior to an erroneous administrative demotion action to the grade of staff sergeant (E-5).  His administrative demotion was based upon the failure to keep fit; however, he had a medical condition that precluded him from achieving a passing score on his fitness assessment (FA).  Although, the military did not think he met fitness standards, it was determined that he was fit for each deployment.  Nevertheless, since he had a medical condition the demotion action should not have taken place and he should have been able to retire in the highest grade held satisfactorily, which was as an E-6.   

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant’s military personnel records indicate he enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 26 April 1991.  

According to AFPC/DPSOE, the applicant was demoted to the grade of E-5, effective 13 August 2010.  

On 1 May 2011, the applicant retired in the grade of staff sergeant (E-5), with a narrative reason for separation of “Voluntary Retirement:  Maximum Service or Time In Grade”.  He was credited with 20 years and 5 days of total active service.  

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C, D, and E.  


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial as it relates to an error or injustice occurring as a result of the applicant’s demotion action.  The applicant failed to submit sufficient supporting documentation to validate an injustice or violation of the Air Force Fitness Policy, as it relates to his FA failure.  In this case, the applicant indicated his administrative demotion action on 13 August 2010 was due to his failure to keep fit.  However, he was not scheduled to have surgery until November 2010 and his listed limitations after his surgery were not transcribed on an AF Form 469, Duty Limiting Condition Report or AF Form 422, Notification of Air Force Member’s Qualification Status.  In accordance with AFI 36-2905, Fitness Program, providers will list physical limitations on the AF Form 469.  When physical limitations preclude the member from participating in fitness activities for greater than 30 days and/or accomplishing the FA, the member will follow local policy to obtain an exercise prescription and determination of FA exemption from the exercise physiologist/Fitness Program Manager (EP/FPM).  Unless a member is given a composite exemption, he/she will continue to prepare for and be assessed on non-exempt components of the FA.  While the applicant provided a memorandum from the medical community to state that he had a medical condition, the document was dated November 2013.  If the applicant was injured or ill during the FA, he should have sought medical attention and notified the Fitness Assessment Cell (FAC) before completing the FA.  The applicant’s fitness records are no longer present for review in the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS) due to his retirement, as such; a determination cannot be made on his FA failures.  

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial as it relates to an error existing in the calculation of the applicant’s retired pay.  In order to determine which pay plan applies to an airman, the service uses the Date Initially Entered Uniformed Service (DIEUS).  In this case, the applicant’s DIEUS is 1 February 1991.  As such, he was originally under the High-3/REDUX retirement plan.  The applicant came on active duty 26 April 1991 and progressed to the grade of E-6, with a date of rank of 1 August 2007.  On 10 August 2010, he was administratively demoted to the grade of E-5.  He later retired, effective 1 May 2011, under the Final Basic Pay plan.  In accordance with (IAW) 10 U.S.C. § 8961(b), Retired Grade, General Rule, unless entitled to a higher grade under some other provision of law, enlisted members of the Regular forces retired for other than disability retire in the regular grade held on the date of retirement.  As outlined in 10 USC § 8961(b), the applicant held the grade of E-5 at the time of retirement.  A review of the Military Personnel Data System (MilPDS) and the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) records indicate the applicant was retired in that grade.  Also, 10 USC § 1407(f), Exception for Enlisted Members Reduced in Grade and Officers who Do Not Serve Satisfactorily in Highest Grade Held, is applied when determining retired pay for members who are demoted within three years of retirement.  It indicates that enlisted members who are demoted within three years of retirement and are not promoted to a higher grade will have their retired pay calculated under 10 USC § 1406, Retired Pay Base for Members Who First Became Members Before September 8, 1980:  Final Basic Pay.  As such, DFAS calculated the applicant’s retired pay based on Final Basic Pay at the grade of E-5; therefore, his retired pay is correct.  

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit D.

AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial as it relates to the applicant’s request to be reinstated to the grade of E-6.  According to the applicant, he was administratively demoted for failure to keep fit.  However, he failed to provide sufficient supporting documentation to validate an injustice or violation of the Air Force Fitness Policy.  A review of the Automated Records Management System (ARMS) reveals no documentation pertaining to the applicant’s demotion.  This, however, does not mean that it did not exist at one time.  It simply could mean that the Military Personnel Section (MPS) failed to forward the documents for file.  The applicant’s promotion history file indicates that GSR 4H (admin demotion) was updated in August 2010 and the Military Personnel Data System (MilPDS) was updated to reflect the rank of E-5 effective 13 August 2010.  These updates could not be accomplished without a source document.  The applicant also received two referral Enlisted Performance Reports (EPRs) for the periods 1 October 2007 thru 26 February 2008 and 27 February 2009 thru 26 February 2010 for failure to maintain Air Force physical fitness standards. 

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 23 January 2015 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit F).


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 error or injustice.  We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief.


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-2014-01744 in Executive Session on 3 March 2015, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 April 2014, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 26 August 2014.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 26 November 2014.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 2 December 2014,     
                 w/atchs.
	Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 January 2015.