Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04745
Original file (BC-2011-04745.txt) Auto-classification: Approved
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04745 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

1. The Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS) record be 
updated to remove the duplicate entry for her 25 Jan 05 Fitness 
Assessment (FA) results (Administratively resolved). 

 

2. Her FAs, dated 26 Aug 08 and 28 Oct 08, be declared void and 
removed from the AFFMS. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

The results of her 25 Jan 05 FA is entered twice in the AFFMS. 

 

Her FAs on 16 Aug 08 and 25 Aug 08 were inappropriately 
administered, resulting in failing scores and unjustly causing 
her Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) for the period 18 Oct 07 
through 28 Oct 08 to be a referral EPR. Based upon the decision 
of the AFBCMR in her earlier case (BC-2010-02102), her referral 
EPR was voided and expunged from her record. Since the two FAs 
in question were the cause of the referral EPR, they should be 
removed from her record as well. 

 

In support of her request, she provides an expanded personal 
statement, and copies of her Air Force Forms 422, Notification 
of Air Force Member’s Qualification Status, documents related to 
her FA history, two memoranda supporting the EPR removal, a 
Chronological Record of Medical Care, and documentation from her 
previous case before the AFBCMR. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade 
of technical sergeant (E-6). Due to medical issues, on 31 Jul 
08 she was put on a medical profile which precluded her from 


accomplishing the crunches (sit ups) portion of the FA. On 
20 Oct 08, her medical profile was extended to 12 Jan 09. 

 

She failed to meet the minimum fitness standards on two 
consecutive FAs: on 26 Aug 08 with a score of 69.72, and on 
28 Oct 08, with a score of 55. As a result, she received a 
referral EPR for the period 18 Oct 07 through 28 Oct 08, which 
rendered her ineligible for promotion. 

 

On 1 Jan 09, she passed her FA (still exempt from crunches). 

 

On 24 Apr 10, she petitioned the AFBCMR (Docket Number BC-2010-
02102) to void her referral EPR for the period 18 Oct 07 through 
28 Oct 08, contending she was not given sufficient time to 
adjust to the new workout plan given to her by her doctors. A 
majority of the Board determined the evidence she presented did 
not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice. 
However, on 13 Apr 11, after careful consideration of all 
factors involved, the Secretary’s designee, in the exercise of 
his discretionary authority, did not concur with the 
determination of a majority of the Board and directed the 
applicant’s military records be corrected to reflect that her 
referral EPR be voided and expunged from her record, and her 
date of rank to TSgt be changed to 1 Feb 09. The Secretary’s 
designee based his rationale for voiding and removing her 
referral EPR on the fact that the evidence she presented cast 
doubt on whether the FAs were appropriately administered. 

 

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: 

 

HQ AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial indicating there is no evidence 
of an error or injustice. Although the applicant was diagnosed 
with Gastro Esophageal Reflux Disease (GERD), there is no clear 
evidence the disease prevented her from achieving a passing 
fitness assessment. She had an AF IMT 22, Notification of Air 
Force Member’s Qualification Status, on file which cleared her 
to perform the cycle ergometry, pushups, and abdominal 
circumference portions of the FA at the time. Even if on a 
medical profile, military members are still required to take 
their FA on the components not exempt. She tested on 26 Aug 08 
which was 3 days prior to the expiration date of her medical 
profile, dated 30 Jul 08. She tested again on 28 Oct 08 on the 
components (same as previous profile) listed on her AF IMT 422, 
dated 20 Oct 08. Both fitness assessments were administered in 
accordance with Air Force policy. 

 

The complete HQ AFPC/DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 12 Mar 12 for review and comment within 30 days. 
As of this date, no response has been received by this office. 
(Exhibit D). 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. The 
applicant claims the previous decision to remove a referral EPR 
from her record should logically result in the removal of the 
contested Fitness Assessment (FA) scores as they formed the 
basis of the now removed Referral EPR. After a thorough review 
of the evidence of record and the applicant’s complete 
submission, we agree. We note the comments of the Air Force 
office of primary responsibility (OPR) indicating the contested 
FAs were carried out appropriately and in accordance with Air 
Force policy. However, in view of the fact the Secretary’s 
designee, in considering the applicant’s previous request, found 
the evidence was sufficient to cast doubt as to whether the FAs 
were appropriately administered, we believe it appropriate to 
resolve any doubt in this matter in the applicant’s favor. We 
note the applicant’s request related to the duplicate entry in 
the AFFMS related to her 25 Jan 05 FA score has been resolved 
administratively. Therefore, to preclude the possibility of an 
injustice to the applicant, we recommend her records be 
corrected as indicated below. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: 

 

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air 
Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that her 
Fitness Assessments (FAs), dated 26 Aug 08 and 28 Oct 08, were 
declared void and removed from the Air Force Fitness Management 
System (AFFMS). 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

 


The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2011-04745 in Executive Session on 14 Jun 12, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

All members voted to correct the records as recommended. The 
following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 Nov 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 24 Feb 12, w/atchs. 

Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Mar 12. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 

 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01534

    Original file (BC-2012-01534.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends updating the push-up component of the applicant’s fitness assessment to reflect “exempt” in AFFMS; which would change her overall composite score to 88.33 (Satisfactory). The complete DPSIM evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit B. AFPC/DPSID recommends approval of the applicant’s request to remove her contested EPR. The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-05042

    Original file (BC-2011-05042.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which are attached at Exhibit C and D. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends the AFBCMR approve the applicant’s request to void the contested report. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03222

    Original file (BC 2013 03222.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant provided a memorandum dated 28 Mar 14 from her commander expressing his support to have the 28 Aug 12 FA removed from her records. The applicant contends that her medical conditions unfairly precluded her from attaining a passing score on her 17 Dec 10, 11 Feb 11, 6 May 11, and 28 Aug 12...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04786

    Original file (BC-2011-04786.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    In support of her request, the applicant provides copies of her AF IMTs 422, Notification of Air Force Member's Qualification Status, corrected Enlisted Performance Report (EPR), Individual Fitness Assessment History, and supporting documentation from her doctor, supervisor and commander. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05761

    Original file (BC 2013 05761 .txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In Accordance With (IAW) AFI 36-2905, Fitness Program, dated 21 Oct 13, any military member can appeal their FA through a wing-level appeals board and then through the AFPC Fitness Assessment Appeals Board (FAAB) within two years of discovering the error/injustice. The applicant did not file an appeal through the Evaluation Report Appeals Board (ERAB) under the provisions of AFI 36-2406, Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Systems. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Oct 14.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 01883

    Original file (BC 2012 01883.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    She states that the MTF failed to initiate an AF Form 469 in a timely manner, and that she was not placed on a FA exemption until Nov 10. SAF/IG also states that “Because these abnormal X-ray results were not communicated to her until Oct 10, almost a year later, she dutifully continued to comply with the muscular plan of care treatments that resulted in an Air Force FA failure for pushups, even with continuing symptoms.” In fact, the applicant achieved a perfect score of 10/10 points on...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03538

    Original file (BC 2013 03538.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 15 Feb 13, he was given a AF Form 422, Notification of Air Force Qualification Status, which incorrectly authorized him to complete push-ups and sit-ups during FA testing, resulting in failure of his 28 Feb 13 FA because he only completed 10 push-ups. The applicant did not provide the Army version of the profile that was given to him, nor did he provide the original profile that should have been dated and signed by the Medical Provider on or about 15 Feb 13. While the Board notes the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-05108

    Original file (BC-2011-05108.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    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: HQ AFPC/DPSIM recommends removal of her 23 Aug 11 FA, however, recommends denial of her request to void and remove her 25 May 11 FA because the “member was tested correctly.” The complete AFPC/DPSIM evaluation, with attachments, is...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02801

    Original file (BC-2012-02801.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    If she had been on the correct profile when she completed the June 2011 FA, she would have passed the FA with a 75.5 score and would not have received the referral EPR. DPSID states that based on the AFPC/DPSIM advisory to grant the relief sought to exempt the cardio component of the FA dated 8 June 2011, they contend that the fitness assessment failure is an inappropriate comment on the contested referral EPR, and as a result, the referral EPR should be removed from her record. The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04933

    Original file (BC 2013 04933.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    In spite of this, her profile allowed her to perform crunches, but after getting another note from her doctor, the Deployment Availability Working Group (DAWG)1 threw it out and agreed with her cardiologist that all timed events were dangerous. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In response to the Air Force evaluation, the applicant’s commander provides a memorandum, dated 13 Mar 2014, to serve as his invalidation...