RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04042 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Fitness Assessment (FA), dated 3 Jul 12, be removed from his records. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Upon receiving a medical evaluation, he was diagnosed with mild asthma; therefore, the contested FA should be removed because his documented medical condition precluded him from a achieving a passing score on a non-exempt portion of the FA. 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 technical sergeant (E-6). On 23 May 11, the applicant participated in an FA and attained an overall composite score of 72.70, resulting in an unsatisfactory rating. On 23 Feb 12, the applicant participated in an FA and attained an overall composite score of 49.10, resulting in an unsatisfactory rating. On 3 Jul 12, the applicant participated in the contested FA and attained an overall composite score of 63.80, resulting in an unsatisfactory rating. On 20 Dec 12, the applicant participated in an FA and attained an overall composite score of 43.25, resulting in an unsatisfactory rating. During this FA the applicant was exempt from the cardio component. On 20 Mar 13, the applicant participated in an FA and attained an overall composite score of 54.50, resulting in an unsatisfactory rating. During this FA the applicant was exempt from the cardio component. On 11 Apr 13, the applicant’s medical provider performed an evaluation and records review to determine if there were medical conditions that precluded the applicant from achieving a passing score on the following FAs: 23 May 11, 23 Feb 12, 3 Jul 12, 20 Dec 12, and 20 Mar 13. The provider determined the applicant had a medical condition that precluded him from achieving a passing score in a non-exempt portion for the 3 Jul 12 FA. On 20 Feb 14, the Fitness Assessment Appeals Board (FAAB) disapproved the applicant’s request on the basis that the applicant’s injury was not validated by his medical provider and there was no indication that the commander wanted invalidate the contested FA. Additionally, the applicant’s FA history reflects a trend of failures. 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 included at Exhibit B. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial due to lack of supporting documentation to demonstrate an error or injustice. While the applicant contends that he had a medical condition which precluded successful completion of the 3 Jul 12 FA, he did not provide specific physical limitations by a medical provider or a commander's invalidation letter. In accordance with AFI 36- 2905, Fitness Program, paragraph 4.2.2 "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. Unless the member is given a composite exemption, the member will continue to prepare for and be assessed on non- exempt components of the FA." and paragraph 4.2.2.2, "the provider will specify the length of time required for physical limitations." While the applicant provided a memorandum from the medical provider that stated he had a medical condition that precluded him from achieving a passing score in a non-exempt portion of the FA, there is nothing that states what the applicant's limitations were at that time. A commander may invalidate the FA results by notifying the FAC in writing. If the FA is invalidated, the Airman will be required to retest on all non-exempt FA components within five duty days from original FA test date. If an AF Form 422 is required, an additional five duty days will be allowed for the AF Form 422 to be generated and provided. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 12 May 14 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit C). THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 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 determination the applicant is not the victim of an error or injustice. While the applicant has provided documentation indicating that he had a medical condition that precluded him from passing the contested FA, said documentation does not indicate the precise nature of the condition and makes it impossible for us to conclusively determine if the condition unfairly precluded him from attaining a passing score on the contested FA and, if it did, what kind of relief would be appropriate. Therefore, 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-2013-04042 in Executive Session on 24 Sep 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 Jul 13, w/atch. Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 19 Mar 14, w/atchs. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 May 14.