Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02873
Original file (BC-2012-02873.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-02873

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His fitness assessment (FA) dated 2 August 2010 be removed from 
the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS).  

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His FA was conducted when conditions were not in compliance with 
the requirements set forth in AFI 36-2905, Fitness Program.

Attachment 8, paragraph A8 of the AFI states that 
safety/environmental conditions must be evaluated to determine 
if the fitness assessment can be properly conducted.  Paragraph 
A8.2.15 concerns heat stress and states that the wet bulb globe 
temperature (WBGT) should be <85 degrees F; or heat index <99 
degrees when WBGT is not available.  On 2 August 2010, per the 
Barksdale bioenvironmental engineering office, the WBGT at 0800L 
was 85.3F and 92.7F at 1100L.  

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 Senior Airman (SrA), E-4.  

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 applicant provided a signed memorandum from the Director of 
Bioenvironmental Engineering Operations stating that the WBGT 
readings for 2 August 2010 were 85.3 degrees F at 0800L and 92.7 
degrees F at 1100L (Exhibit C).  

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial.  DPSIM states that per AFI 36-
2905, AFGM4, “Heat Stress: Wet Bulb Global Temperature must be 
<86 degrees F at the start of the 1.5 mile run/1.0-mile walk.”  
The applicant took the cardio component of the test at 0930 on 
2 August 2010.  The applicant provided a memorandum that only 
stated the WBGT at 0800 (85.3) and 1100 (92.7).  With the times 
being so far apart they cannot calculate the temperature at 0930 
on 2 August 2010.  

The complete AFPC/DPSIM evaluation, with attachment, is at 
Exhibit D.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 9 October 2012 for review and comment within 30 
days (Exhibit E).  To date, this office has not received a 
response. 

________________________________________________________________

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.  After 
thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the 
applicant's contentions, we are not persuaded the contested FA 
is in error or unjust.  The excerpt from AFI 36-2905 and the 
signed memo from the Director of Bioenvironmental Engineering 
Operations, specifying the wet bulb globe temperatures (WBGT) at 
0800L and 1100L are noted; however, in the absence of the signed 
FA score sheet, signed fitness questionnaire and signed memo 
from the NCOIC or OIC of Bioenvironmental Engineering, stating 
the weather conditions at the time the applicant was completing 
the cardio component of the contested FA, i.e., 0930 hours on 
2 August 2010, we find insufficient evidence to warrant 
disturbing the record.  However, should the applicant provide 
such evidence, we would be willing to reconsider his request.  
In view of the above and 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 5 March 2013, under the provisions of 
AFI 36-2603:

			, Panel Chair
      , Member
			, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR 
Docket Number BC-2012-02873:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dtd 2 July 2012, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 12 July 2012.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 25 September 2012, 
w/atch.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 October 2012.




                                   
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00905

    Original file (BC-2011-00905.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 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

    Original file (BC-2012-05001.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2013 | BC-2012-02006

    Original file (BC-2012-02006.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    His provider’s memorandum for record (MFR) stated he had a medical condition that prevented him from attaining a passing score on the walking component of his FA; however, the test was not removed from his records. Upon expiration of your 42 days reconditioning, you are cleared to test in all components of the AF Fitness Test.” On 29 May 12, a memorandum was sent to applicant requesting additional documentation for removal of his FA dated 29 Oct 10. While he contends that he was...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-00021

    Original file (BC-2012-00021.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 | CY2012 | BC-2012-01097

    Original file (BC-2012-01097.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Members will be eligible for FA 42 days after the expiration date of physical limitations, as annotated on Air Force (AF) Form 469. _________________________________________________________________ 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. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In accordance with AFI 36-2603,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02382

    Original file (BC 2013 02382.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    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-2012-03926

    Original file (BC-2012-03926.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03926 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Fitness Assessment (FA) scores, dated 10 Sep 09, 10 Dec 09, 31 Aug 10, 13 Oct 10, and 16 Feb 11, be declared void and removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS); in the alternative, his records be corrected to reflect he...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00455

    Original file (BC-2013-00455.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The failed FA is an injustice as she is currently pending medical care for a chronic hip condition. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant responded stating that she has a chronic health condition that affected her ability to pass the FA. Her squadron commander issued her a Letter of Counseling (LOC) but then dropped it as a result of her medical condition.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02626

    Original file (BC-2012-02626.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends approval since per AFI 36-2905, Attachment 13, Sympathomimetic Bronchodilators such as Albuterol and Salmeterol may raise pulse when administered during the walk aerobic component of the FA. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01461

    Original file (BC-2012-01461.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01461 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The cardio portion of his fitness assessment (FA) score recorded on 13 December 2011 be reflected as exempt in the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS). The Board notes the Air Force office of primary responsibility recommends denial, however,...