RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01797 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His grade be restored to technical sergeant (E-6). APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He appealed to be restored to the grade of technical sergeant (E- 6) to his chain of command, but was denied. Shortly after his appeal was denied, two Fitness Assessment (FA) failures, which were part of his demotion package, were removed from his Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS) record; however, he was told by his chain of command there was nothing they could do for him. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 24 Jun 94, the applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force. On 29 Oct 12, the applicant’s commander notified him he was recommending his demotion to the grade of staff sergeant (E-5) IAW 36-2502, Airman Promotion/Demotion Programs. The specific basis for this action was failure to keep physically fit IAW 36-2905, Fitness Programs, as evidenced by four FA failures between and . On 13 Nov 12, the applicant was demoted by the approval authority. On 4 Dec 12, the approval authority denied his appeal request and upheld the demotion action. On 3 Jun 13, the applicant submitted a grade restoration request to his chain of command. On 7 Nov 13, upon recommendations from lower-level commanders, and a legal review, the approval authority denied the grade restoration request. On 20 Feb 14, according to information provided by the applicant, the Fitness Assessment Appeals Board (FAAB) directed the removal of two of his FA failures ( and ) from the applicant’s AFFMS record. On 21 Apr 14, the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) conducted a grade determination evaluation in conjunction with the applicant’s retirement processing and found the applicant served satisfactorily in the higher grade of technical sergeant (E-6) and directed the applicant be advanced to that grade on the retired list, effective 24 Jun 24, the date the applicant would have completed 30 years of service. On 30 Jun 14, the applicant was relieved from active duty and retired in the grade of staff sergeant (E-5), effective 1 Jul 14, and was credited with 20 years and 7 days of active service. 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. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. AFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion/ Demotion Programs, states, airmen may be demoted for failing to maintain or demonstrate the ability and willingness to attain physical standards. Further, AFI 36-2905, Fitness Program, states unit commanders may take adverse administrative action upon a member's unsatisfactory fitness score on an official FA. Attachment 14 provides commanders guidance when selecting the appropriate administrative and personnel actions for members who fail to attain physical fitness standards. This table is only illustrative and is not binding; commanders may use more than one action per failure. Although two of the six FA failures have been removed by the FAAB, the applicant does not have the support/approval of his commander, or the demotion authority, to restore his rank to Technical Sergeant (E-6). The applicant still has four remaining FA failures, of which the failure was due to poor performance. Therefore, the commander is within his authority to demote the applicant for the remaining FA failures and deny the applicant's request for restoration of rank. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluations was forwarded to the applicant on 4 Oct 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). 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 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 opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. While we note the Fitness Assessment Appeals Board (FAAB) has determined that two of the four Fitness Assessment (FA) failures that formed the basis of the action should be removed, we are not convinced that the removal of these FA failures undermines the basis for the contested action. In this respect, we note that the applicant’s intent to appeal to the FAAB was specifically noted during the installation-level legal review of his plea to have his rank restored and, regardless of the fact the two FAs may eventually be removed from his record, the chain of command was not persuaded to change their previous decision to demote the applicant. 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-2014-01797 in Executive Session on 25 Feb 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Apr 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 28 May 14. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Oct 14.