RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04244
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Fitness Assessments (FAs) dated 27 January 2012 and 27 April
2012 be removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System
(AFFMS).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His two failed fitness assessments are due to inaccuracy of
medical limitations and errors on existing profiles. Due to
asthma related medications he was not to participate in the
cardio portion of the test, only the waist, push-up and sit-up
components. However, his profile was written incorrectly and he
tested in the walking and abdominal circumference measurement
components.
In support of the applicants appeal, he provided a letter from
the family medicine physical assistant and copies of his AF Form
422, Notification of Air Force Members Qualification Status.
The applicants 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 applicants last five FA scores are as follows:
DATE SCORE
5 July 2011 UNSATISFACTORY
31 August 2011 UNSATISFACTORY
* 27 January 2012 UNSATISFACTORY
* 27 April 2012 UNSATISFACTORY
17 August 2012 SATISFACTORY
*Contested FA score.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial of his request to remove the
contested FAs; however, they recommend updating the AFFMS to
reflect Exempt for the cardio component. If the cardio
component is exempted, the contested FA results would change to
67.5 (Unsatisfactory) for the 27 January 2012 FA and
82 (Satisfactory) for the 27 April 2012 FA.
The applicant provided an AF Form 422, Physical Profile Serial
Report, dated 26 January 2012, which limited him from the sit-up,
push-up, and the 1.5 mile run components; he provided a second AF
Form 422, dated 7 August 2012, that limited him from the 1.0 mile
walk and the 1.5 mile run. Of note, the applicant was using
Albuterol to control asthma during the time period including the
two contested FAs.
It is unclear why the applicant was cleared to take the walk test
as indicated on AF Form 422, dated 26 January 2012; however, it
is apparent he should not have been. The AF Form 422, dated
7 August 2012 corrected this oversight after the fact. In short,
the applicant should not have been required to take the walk test
due to his using a heart rate affecting medication as it
negatively impacted the cardio component of the FA. There is no
evidence that indicates why any other component should be removed
from AFFMS.
The complete DPSIM evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 8 March 2013, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded
to the applicant for review and response within 30 days (Exhibit
C). As of this date, no response has been received by this
office.
_________________________________________________________________
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 an error or injustice warranting
removing the contested FAs from the AFFMS. The applicant has not
provided sufficient evidence that the assessments were unjust,
warranting their removal in their entirety. In view of the above
and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis
upon which to recommend favorable action on the applicants
requests
4. Notwithstanding the above, sufficient relevant evidence has
been presented to warrant partial relief. We believe the
documentation provided by the applicant provides a reasonable
basis to conclude the applicant should have been exempt from
performing the cardio portions of the contested FAs. Therefore,
we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force
office of primary responsibility that only the cardio component
of his FA test of 27 January 2012 and 27 April 2012 be corrected.
Therefore, we recommend the records be corrected as indicated
below.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that the cardio
component of the Fitness Assessment dated 27 January 2012 and
27 April 2012 be amended to reflect exempt in the Air Force
Fitness Management System.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2012-04244 in Executive Session on 29 May 2013, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The
following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number
BC-2012-04244 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 August 2012, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 18 February 2013,
w/atchs.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 March 2013.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04690
On 24 March 2011, the applicant was issued an AF Form 422, Notification of Air Force Members Qualification Status, which exempted him from the 1.5 mile run and sit-up components of the FA, until 10 May 2011. On 17 May 2011, the applicant was issued an AF Form 422, which exempted him from the 1.5 mile run and sit-up components of the FA, until 10 June 2011. We took notice of the applicants complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00377
In the applicant's DD Form 149, he also indicated he had ankle pain when completing the sit-up component of the 31 August 2012 FA. Unfortunately, neither profile exempts him from the sit-up component. ________________________________________________________________ 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 | CY2013 | BC 2013 01591
On 29 Nov 2011, a medical evaluation letter was signed by the same provider who issued the previous AF Form 469s. The letter states, There are medical conditions that preclude this member from achieving a passing score on the Air Force fitness assessment. On 1 Dec 2011, an AF Form 469, Duty Limiting Condition Report, was initiated from his Medical Provider, which could exempt the applicant from the cardio and push-up components of the FA. On 27 Mar 2012, a medical evaluation letter was...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02364
The applicant’s last five FA scores are as follows: DATE 10 Feb 10 31 Aug 10 * 14 Sep 11 27 Oct 11 2 Feb 12 *Contested FA score. _________________________________________________________________ , Panel Chair , Member , Member THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that the cardio and sit-up components of the Fitness Assessment dated 14 Sep 11 be amended to reflect “exempt” in the Air Force...
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-05541
Although the applicant is not clear on which FA test he would like removed from his records, we believe based on the Air Force office of primary responsibility review of his record and the AF Form 108 provided by the applicant that reflects his FA dated 15 Mar 12 is, in fact, the assessment he is requesting to be removed. The AF Form 422, Notification of Air Force Members Qualification Status, documenting his limitations and duty exemptions is noted; however, we also note the Military...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02388
________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: There was a discrepancy between restrictions placed on his AF Form 469, Duty Limiting Condition Report, dated 19 Apr 2012 and the testing exemptions reflected on the AF Form 422, Notification of Air Force Member’s Qualification Status, dated 20 Apr 2012. On 23 Apr 2012, he took his copy of the AF Form 422 to his scheduled FA. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04605
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04605 XXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Fitness Assessment (FA) dated 12 Sep 13 be declared void and removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS). _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 20 Mar...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01644
IAW AFI 36-2905, AFGM 1, dated 1 July 2010, Para 1.21.8., exempted members returning from deployment are assessed after the period of acclimatization (42 days from return to home station for RegAF) unless member requests to assess earlier. On 7 Jan 2014, a similar request was considered and denied by the Fitness Assessments Appeals Board (FAAB), due to Insufficient evidence; specifically no commander invalidation. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01664
IAW AFI 36-2905, AFGM 1, dated 1 July 2010, Para 1.21.8., exempted members returning from deployment are assessed after the period of acclimatization (42 days from return to home station for RegAF) unless member requests to assess earlier. On 7 Jan 2014, a similar request was considered and denied by the Fitness Assessments Appeals Board (FAAB), due to Insufficient evidence; specifically no commander invalidation. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE...