AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
DOCKET NUMBERS: BC-2012-01097
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
IN THE MATTER OF:
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her physical Fitness Assessment (FA), dated 29 November 2011, be
removed from her records.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The contested FA is invalid because it was not administered in
accordance with AFI 36-2905.
She was on a medical profile from 12 October 2011 to 26 November
2011, which prevented her from performing high impact activities
or running more than 100 yards. In accordance with Air Force
Instruction (AFI) 36-2905, dated 1 July 2010, paragraph 4.2.2.3,
“The expiration date represents the date the member is medically
cleared to resume physical activities previously restricted.
Members will be eligible for FA 42 days after the expiration date
of physical limitations, as annotated on Air Force (AF) Form 469.
This allows time for reconditioning, if exempted for greater than
30 days.” Therefore, she was not eligible for testing until
7 January 2012. However, she was required to be tested on all FA
components on 29 November 2011; just three days after her duty
limiting conditions expired.
In support of her appeal, the applicant provides copies of her Air
Force Fitness Management printout; an example of the Fitness
Screening Questionnaire; her AF Form 469, Duty Condition Limiting
Report; her AF Form 422, Notification of Air Force Member’s
Qualification Status; United States Court of Appeals case 717F.2d
1170, Bahramizadeh versus United States; Commander’s letter of
support; and excerpts of AFI 36-2905.
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently a member of the Regular Air Force
serving in the grade of master sergeant (E-7). Her FA for
29 November 2011 reflects an unsatisfactory fitness level in the
Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS). The applicant’s
record also reflects she scored unsatisfactory ratings for her FAs
dated 27 February 2012 and 31 January 2011.
the
minimum
component
for
abdominal
The remaining relevant facts, extracted from the applicant’s
military service record, are contained in the evaluation provided
by the Air Force office of primary responsibility at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIM recommends the cardio component of the applicant’s FA,
dated 29 November 2011, be updated to reflect “exempt” in AFFMS.
The applicant was on profile from 12 October 2011 through
26 November 2011 that exempted her from the 1.5 mile run.
However, she was cleared for all other components of the FA.
Nevertheless, she should have been allowed 42 days of re-
conditioning for the cardio component of the FA.
The applicant tested on 29 November 2011 for all four components
of the FA. She scored 36.70 points for the cardio component,
11.80 points due to a waist measurement of 36, 10 points for push-
up component for completing 46 push-ups, and 9.50 points for the
sit-up component for completing 43 sit-ups. The applicant did not
meet
circumference
measurement. Even with their recommended change, the applicant
would still score an unsatisfactory fitness level due to her not
meeting the minimum requirement for the abdominal circumference
component.
The complete DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
In accordance with AFI 36-2603, Air Force Board for Corrections of
Military Records, “If an airman believes the administration of
his/her FA or FA score was in error or unjust, he/she may submit
an application for correction of military records to the AFBCMR.
It is significant that the drafters of the AFI expressively give
the AFBCMR the authority to remove FA scores but does not give
anyone the authority to alter FA scores. Therefore, the disputed
score must be removed if it was in error.
The applicant’s complete rebuttal, with attachment, is at Exhibit
D.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing
law or regulations.
2. The application was timely filed.
2
3. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice requiring partial relief. We
note that AFPC/DPSIM recommends the cardio component of the
applicant’s FA, dated 29 November 2011, be corrected to reflect
“exempt” in the AFFMS due to the fact that she should have been
allowed 42 days of re-conditioning for that portion of the FA. We
agree with their recommendation. We took notice of the
applicant’s request to have the entire FA removed; however, she
was cleared for all other components of the FA and do not find any
evidence to support removing the entire test. Therefore, based on
the foregoing, we concur with the recommendation of AFPC/DPSIM,
and adopt its rationale as the basis for our decision. Although
the applicant opines the governing AFI does not give anyone the
authority to alter FA scores, in accordance with 10 USC § 1552,
this Board may correct a record in any matter it sees fit in order
to correct an error or to remove an injustice. Accordingly, we
recommend the applicant’s record be corrected as indicated below.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that the cardio
component of her Fitness Assessment, dated 29 November 2011, be
amended to reflect “exempt” in the Air Force Fitness Management
System.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in
Executive Session on 25 October 2012, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
Panel Chair
Member
Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The
following documentary evidence for AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-
01097 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Mar 12, with atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 9 Apr 12.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Apr 12.
Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 30 Apr 12.
Panel Chair
3
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02597
While the applicant provided AF Forms 422, Notification of Air Force Members Qualification Status, dated 2 May 2011, 11 October 2011, and 29 January 2012, which exempted her from the 1.5 mile run, pushups, and sit-up components of the contested FAs, she was evaluated on the height, weight, and abdominal circumference in accordance with her profile. Therefore, we find it reasonable to conclude that had her condition been timely diagnosed, competent authority would likely have exempted her...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03261
DPSIM states per AFI 36-2905, Fitness Program, paragraph 4.2.5, all members will complete abdominal circumference (AC) assessment unless there is a composite exemption or, under rare circumstances, a component exemption determined by the exercise physiologist or fitness program manager upon recommendation by the provider. For someone who had back to back shoulder surgeries and is unable to perform physical activities for over a year, 42 days is not realistic. Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant,...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-05779
A resume of the applicant's FA results is as follows: Date Composite Score Rating *28 Nov 12 38.40 Unsatisfactory 31 May 12 85.90 Satisfactory 13 May 11 93.90 Excellent 23 Nov 10 80.10 Good 5 May 10 79.25 Good 2 Nov 09 85.00 Good * Contested FA The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 1. They...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02382
Members must test by the last day of the month, six calendar months following the previous passing test (e.g., if member tested on 15 April, then member must retest on/before 31 October of the same year. With a RNLTD date of 30 May 11, the applicant was not required to test prior to his scheduled FA and was allowed 42 days after the RNLTD date to test, but was not required to do so. DPSIM concludes that the contested FA is a legitimate unsatisfactory score, in accordance with AFI 36-2905,...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-05096
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05096 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her 31 Aug 12 Fitness Assessment (FA) be declared void and removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS). The applicants last five FA results are as follows: Date Composite Score Rating 30 Nov 12 88.00 Satisfactory* 31 Aug...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 02768
This logic also concludes a medical condition causing weight gain would cause an increase in AC. She should have never taken the walk test while her dosage was still being adjusted and the FA should be invalidated based on the solid medical evidence presented. While we note the applicant requests the entire FA dated 25 Apr 2012, be removed, the AF Form 422 reflected that she was cleared to test using AC and she has not provided substantial evidence to persuade us otherwise.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03162
The applicants last five FA results are as follows: Date Composite Score AC Component Rating 11 Jun 13 Exempt Exempt Exempt all four categories *29 May 13 0.0 36.00/0.00 Unsatisfactory (Exempt from Cardio/PU/SU) 29 Oct 12 85.50 32.50/17.10 Satisfactory (Exempt from Cardio/PU/SU) 23 Apr 12 100.00 31.00/20.00 Excellent (Exempt from Cardio/PU/SU) 31 Oct 11 79.50 33.50/15.90 Satisfactory (Exempt from Cardio/PU/SU) * Contested FA In accordance with guidance at the time of contested FA, AFI...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04468
Finally, the applicant did not provide any additional supporting documentation to consider, i.e., commanders invalidation, AF Form 422, etc. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial of the applicants request to void and remove the FAs dated 22 Feb 11, 1 Mar 11, and 22 Jun 11. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM and AFPC/DPSIDE evaluations is at Exhibit B and Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-00021
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibits C, D, E, and G. ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial of the applicant’s request to remove his 19 Feb 2010 FA from the AFFMS. DPSIM states the applicant is requesting his FA dated 19 Feb 2010 be removed from the AFFMS. The complete DPSID evaluation, with...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05833
After the FA the applicant visited his medical provider and was given a corrected profile. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial of the applicants request to void/remove the FA dated 25 Jan 13. While the AFI does state that a member who is using albuterol medication should be exempt on the walk component, the applicant did not provide justification that would prove he was taking the medication at the time of his...