RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01916 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. His referral Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) rendered for the period 21 Sep 2010 through 20 Aug 2011, be voided from his records. 2. He receive supplemental promotion consideration to the rank of technical sergeant (TSgt, E-6) beginning with cycle 12E6. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Due to medical reasons he was unable to take his fitness assessment (FA) before the 20 Sep 2011 closeout date of his EPR. He was scheduled to take his FA on 19 Sep 2011. However, on the day of his FA he became ill and was diagnosed with a respiratory infection. He rescheduled his FA for 26 Sep 2011 and he passed. The applicant’s 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). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibits D and E. ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial of the applicant’s request to void his referral EPR. DPSIM states his previous FA was administered on 16 Jun 2011. He scored an “unsatisfactory” which required him due to re-test on 14 Sep 2011. Had he tested on 19 Sep 2011, he still would have been overdue by five days. In accordance with (IAW) AFI 36-2905, Air Force Fitness Program, airmen must retest within 90 days following an unsatisfactory FA. Unit commanders may not mandate airmen retest any sooner than the end of the 90 day reconditioning period; however, airmen may volunteer to do so. Retesting in the first42 days after an unsatisfactory FA requires unit commander approval since recognized medical guidelines recommend 42 days as theminimum timeframe to recondition from unsatisfactory to satisfactory status in a mannerthat reduces risk of injury. It is the airman'sresponsibility to ensure heretests before the 90 day reconditioning period expires (non-currency begins on the91stday). The complete DPSIMevaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSIDrecommends denialof the applicant's requestto void the contestedEPR. DPSID states the applicantdid not file an appeal through the EvaluationReport Appeals Boardunder theprovisions of AFI 36·2401, Correcting Officer and Enlisted EvaluationReports. AFI 36-2905 states, “It is every airman'sresponsibility to maintain the standards set forth in this AFI 365 days a year. The goal of the Fitness Program is to motivate all members toparticipate in a year-round physical conditioning program that emphasizes total fitness, to include proper aerobic conditioning, strength/flexibility training, and healthy eating.”In the applicant's case, he failed to retest and remain current within 90 days after initially failing hisFA. He also failed to ensure that he hada current FA on file as ofthe close-out of the contested EPR. The evaluation was completed within Air Forcerequirements. Therefore,to change or void this evaluation would be an injustice to other airmen who have met Air Forcerequirementsand successfully maintained their fitness currency during the rating period. The complete DPSIDevaluationis at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial of the applicant’s request for supplemental promotion consideration. DPSOE states the referral EPR in question rendered the applicant ineligible for promotion consideration IAWAFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion/Demotion Programs. AFI 36-2406, Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Systems, states that a report is referred when "Does notMeet" blocks aremarked in the performance assessment section of AF Form 910/911. In this case, the applicant did not meet Air Force fitness standards due to a failed FA earlier in the reporting period. The complete DPSOEevaluationis at Exhibit D. 2 APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 21 Aug 2012, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant 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 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 and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES 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 this application in Executive Session on 5 Mar 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR BC-2012- 01916 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 2 May 2012, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSIM, dated 31 May 2012, w/atch. Exhibit D. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSID, dated 28 Jun 2012. Exhibit E. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSOE, dated 20 Jul 2012. Exhibit F. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Aug 2012. Panel Chair