RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03234
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His 13 Jan 11 Unsatisfactory Fitness Assessment (FA) score be
removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS).
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
On 13 Jan 11, at 7:30 a.m., he failed his third FA due to the
extreme cold. The temperature at the time of the test was below
20 degrees Fahrenheit and as required by AFI 36-2905, Air Force
Fitness Program, the test should not have been administered.
The Fitness Assessment Cell (FAC) is required to communicate
with base weather to determine the temperature. On the day of
his FA, the temperature was 17.6 degrees Fahrenheit.
The extreme cold during the test made it difficult for him to
control his breathing, which affected his pace and was a large
contributing factor in his FA failure.
The Area Defense Counsel advised him to have his third FA
failure removed from the AFFMS since it was administered outside
the scope of current regulations.
In support of his request, the applicant provides a personal
statement and copy of meteorological documentation from the 27th
Special Operations Support Squadron Weather Flight (27 OSS/OSW).
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.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application,
extracted from the applicants military records are contained in
the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force
at Exhibit B.
________________________________________________________________
THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ USAF/A1PP recommends denial. A1PP states the applicants
request was reviewed by the Air Force Services Agency (AFSVA),
Air Force Medical Support Agency Healthcare Operations
(AFMSA/SG3O), and, Military Force Policy Division
Promotions/Evaluations, (AF/A1PPP) and all recommended not
removing the applicants 13 Jan 11 FA from AFFMS. AFSVA
verified with the Cannon AFB FAC that on 13 Jan 11, just before
testing began, the temperature was 21.2 degrees Fahrenheit.
The complete A1PP evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit B.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant on 6 Jan 11 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 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 opinion and recommendation
of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its
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 28 Feb 12, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-
2011-03234:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 8 Aug 11, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, HQ USAF/A1PP, undated, w/atch.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Jan 12.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00905
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicants military records are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit B. DPSIM states that on 23 Apr 2012, a memorandum was sent to the applicant requesting additional documentation, specifically, a signed memorandum from the local base weather office stating that the temperature that day was less than 20 degrees Fahrenheit. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-05001
This guidance supersedes guidelines established in AFI 36-2905 (dated 1 Jul 10), paragraph A8.2.14. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial, indicating the FA was conducted IAW AFI 36-2905, AFGM 2.1, which was applicable at the time of the...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC 2011 03584
He still felt pain in his left knee and the cool weather seemed to intensify the pain level. RMG/CC states, the applicants records indicate he was eligible for promotion with a 1 Jan 2011 effective date. ________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03584
He still felt pain in his left knee and the cool weather seemed to intensify the pain level. RMG/CC states, the applicants records indicate he was eligible for promotion with a 1 Jan 2011 effective date. ________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01118
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01118 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The fitness assessment (FA) score he received on 31 Jan 11 be removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS). _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant was exempt from 3 of the 4...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05369
DPSIM states that the applicant provided a memorandum from the Director, Fitness and Sports Complex at Kadena Air Base, Japan which states her staff was aware of the manufacturers guidance that HR monitors can cause erratic readings and have previously separated walkers after crossing the finish line to keep their distance to avoid syncing with other HR monitors worn by other walkers. After he completed the cardio component of the FA, he had a 20 minute argument with three of the FACs and...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01106
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The fitness exams and the persons administering the assessment were inconsistent with Air Force Instruction. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-01106 in Executive Session on 20 October 2011, under the provisions of AFI...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03826
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit B. A1PP recommends removing the 9 August 2011 FA score from AFFMS due to supporting documentation from the applicants evaluating physician and treating physical therapist. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02873
By letter dated 12 July 2012, AFPC/DPSIM requested the applicant provide additional supporting documentation to substantiate his claim; specifically, copies of his signed fitness questionnaire and a signed memorandum from the NCOIC or OIC of the bioenvironmental engineering office stating the weather conditions for the day in question (Exhibit B). The complete AFPC/DPSIM evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02331
On 2 Jan 14, a similar request was considered and denied by the Fitness Assessment Appeals Board (FAAB), on the basis the applicant did not provide sufficient evidence; specifically AF Form 422. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 11 Feb 14, applicant provided a memorandum in rebuttal of AFPC/DPSIM and FAAB memoranda. While we note an...