RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04690 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His 8 March 2011, 13 September 2011, 1 November 2011, and 1 
February 2012 Fitness Assessment (FA) scores be declared void 
and removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System 
(AFFMS). 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

His first FA failure was due to a back injury he sustained while 
doing the sit-up portion of the test. His commander refused to 
have the test removed because he did not complete the test. His 
next three FA failures were a result of undiagnosed pericarditis 
(inflammation of the membrane that lines the heart). Although, 
a medical evaluation concluded that his undiagnosed condition 
precluded him from achieving a passing score in two of his last 
three assessments, he believes the same condition caused all 
four FA failures. 

 

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 (E-5). 

 

On 8 March 2011, the applicant participated in the contested FA, 
attaining a composite score of 24.30, which constituted an 
unsatisfactory assessment. 

 

On 24 March 2011, the applicant was issued an AF Form 422, Notification of Air Force Member’s 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. 

 

On 17 June 2011, the applicant was hospitalized for 
pericarditis. 

 

On 28 June 2011, an AF Form 469, Duty Limiting Condition Report, 
was initiated that placed duty and mobility restrictions upon 
the applicant, which precluded him from running or walking 
greater than one-half mile, sit-ups, push-ups, and strenuous 
activities which would elevate his heart rate above 120 beats 
per minute (BPM), until 15 August 2011. 

 

On 13 September 2011, the applicant participated in the 
contested FA. Although he was on a profile exempting him from 
the cardio and strength components of the FA, the applicant was 
cleared to be tested on his height, weight, and abdominal 
circumference components. He failed the waist measurement only 
FA test during the contested FA, which constituted an 
unsatisfactory assessment. 

 

On 19 October 2011, an AF Form 469, which extended the duty and 
mobility restrictions described above until 16 January 2012. 

 

On 21 October 2011, the applicant was issued an AF Form 422, 
which exempted him from the cardio and strength components of 
the FA; the applicant was cleared to be tested on his height, 
weight, and abdominal circumference components, until 16 January 
2012. 

 

On 1 November 2011, the applicant participated in the contested 
FA. Although he was on a profile exempting him from the cardio 
and strength components of the FA, the applicant was cleared to 
be tested on his height, weight, and abdominal circumference 
components. He failed the waist measurement only FA test during 
the contested FA, which constituted an unsatisfactory 
assessment. 

 

On 6 January 2012, the applicant was issued an AF Form 422, 
which extended the exemptions described above until 29 February 
2012. 

 

On 1 February 2012, the applicant participated in the contested 
FA. Although he was on a profile exempting him from the cardio 
and strength components of the FAs, the applicant was cleared to 
be tested on his height, weight, and abdominal circumference 
components. He failed the waist measurement only FA test during 
the contested FA, which constituted an unsatisfactory 
assessment. 

 

On 27 February 2012, the applicant was evaluated and diagnosed 
with a medical condition which strictly limits his physical 
activity and ability to engage in physical training exercises. 


On 5 March 2012, the applicant was issued an AF Form 422, which 
once again exempted him from the cardio and strength components 
of the FA; the applicant was cleared to be tested on his height, 
weight, and abdominal circumference components, until 30 April 
2012. 

 

On 23 March 2012, the applicant was exempt from all components 
of the FA. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial, noting the applicant tested fairly 
under his doctor’s orders and in accordance with his profile. 
Specifically, on 8 March 2011, the applicant was not on a 
profile and was cleared to be tested on all components of the 
FA. He was later placed on a profile and only completed the 
abdominal circumference measurements. However, he did not 
obtain passing fitness scores for his 13 September 2011, 1 
November 2011, and 1 February 2012 Fitness Assessments (FA). 
While the applicant provided AF Forms 422, Notification of Air 
Force Member’s Qualification Status, dated 21 October 2011, 6 
January 2012, and 5 March 2012, which exempted him from the 1.5 
mile run, push-up, and sit-up components of these contested FAs, 
he was appropriately evaluated on the height, weight, and 
abdominal circumference in accordance with his profile. 

 

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

In response to the advisory opinion, the applicant provided 
documentation which was previously submitted with his original 
application, which is at Exhibit E. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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. 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 the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance, and 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 AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2012-04690 in Executive Session on 25 June 2013, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 Panel Chair 

 Member 

 Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 2 October 2012, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 4 December 2012, 

 w/atch. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 December 2012. 

 Exhibit E. Applicant submission, undated. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair