RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05483
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His 6 Jun 12 Fitness Assessment (FA) be declared void and removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS).
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The distance and elevation from the fitness center to the authorized walking track unfairly elevated the applicants heart rate prior to beginning his official FA. This unjustly contributed to the unsatisfactory score on the FA.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant served in the Regular Air Force in the grade of Staff Sergeant (E-5) on the date of the FA in question.
The applicants most recent FA results are as follows:
Date
Composite Score
Rating
16 Nov 12
68.00
Unsatisfactory
6 Jun 12
71.22
Unsatisfactory
27 Jan 12
76.11
Satisfactory
28 Oct 11
71.33
Unsatisfactory
29 Apr 11
81.22
Satisfactory
28 Jan 11
72.67
Unsatisfactory
29 Oct 10
34.74
Unsatisfactory
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, which is included at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. The applicants contention is based on the terrain and distance prior to the assessment. AFI 36-2905, Fitness Program, does not have a provision or restriction regarding heart rate prior to the assessment. The walk assessment is scored based on the heart rate and time at completion of the one mile assessment. Nowhere within the AFI does it require a pretest heart rate reading. Further, the applicant requests his entire FA be removed from the AFFMS. However, he did not provide any evidence that would indicate all of the components of the FA were invalid. His argument only applies to the cardio portion.
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 10 May 13 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 timely filed.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. We took notice of the applicants 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 (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. While the Board notes the memo submitted on behalf of the applicant by his commander, we also note that the applicant was subsequently retested and achieved an even lower overall composite score and unsatisfactory rating, undermining his argument that it was the walk to the FA location which caused his initial FA failure. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief.
________________________________________________________________
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-2012-05483 in Executive Session on 10 Sep 13, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Panel Chair
Member
Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 23 Aug 12, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 30 Jan 13, w/atch.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Feb 13.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01179
As of this date, no response has been received by this office. ________________________________________________________________ 2 THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT, be corrected to show that the cardio component of his Fitness Assessment score dated 1 February 2012, be updated to reflect “exempt” in the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS). ...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02087
The V02 in the calculation is 35.807808, when applied to the Alternate Aerobic Test Score Chart in AFI 36-2905, Atch 17, the resulting component score equals a component score of 42.3. Therefore, the AFFMS Fitness Calculator has in fact calculated applicant's score IAW AFI 36-2905. On 2 Nov 13 a similar request was considered and denied by the Fitness Assessments Appeals Board (FAAB) due to No evidence of impropriety, V02 calculations IAW AFI...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04136
On 14 Jan 13 the applicant completed the contested FA with an unsatisfactory score. On 14 Feb 14, the applicants request was considered and partially granted by the Fitness Assessment Appeals Board (FAAB). The FSQ should be completed no earlier than 30 calendar days, but no later than 7 days prior to FA to provide time for medical evaluation, when indicated; however, failure to complete FSQ does not invalidate the FA.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04717
A list of the applicants last 5 FAs is as follows: Date Composite Score Cardio Rating *22 Jul 13 18.88 35/0.00 Unsatisfactory 25 Mar 13 59.63 38/47.70 Unsatisfactory 10 Sep 12 79.78 39/49.80 Satisfactory 24 Feb 12 78.33 41/47.20 Satisfactory 19 Aug 11 86.00 44/52.40 Satisfactory *Contested FA An AF Form 108, dated 4 Sep 13, signed by his medical provider, states the member has been evaluated and has a medical condition precluding the achievement of a passing score. On 20 Feb 14, a similar...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00715
The applicants last 5 FA results are as follows: Date Composite Score Rating 27 Aug 13 72.80 Unsatisfactory 28 Feb 13 75.00 Satisfactory *21 Nov 12 74.13 Unsatisfactory 15 May 12 76.30 Satisfactory 16 Feb 12 60.20 Unsatisfactory *Contested FA On 15 Nov 13, a similar request was considered and denied by the Fitness Assessments Appeals Board (FAAB) due to Insufficient evidence to support applicants medical claim. ______________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03936
While the applicant renders a variety of arguments intended undermine the functioning of the heart rate monitors used during the contested FAs, the only real evidence he has provided in support of his assertions is a supporting statement from a colleague who says he made an independent measurement of the applicants heart rate after the end of the 5 May 13 FA. However, we do not find this statement or the applicants arguments sufficient to conclude that he is the victim of an error or...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05107
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05107 COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Fitness Assessment (FA), dated 21 Sep 2012, be removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS). The applicant did not provide any evidence his 1.0 mile walk was improperly administered during the FA. The 21 Sep 2012 FA was...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05369
DPSIM states that the applicant provided a memorandum from the Director, Fitness and Sports Complex at Kadena Air Base, Japan which states her staff was aware of the manufacturers guidance that HR monitors can cause erratic readings and have previously separated walkers after crossing the finish line to keep their distance to avoid syncing with other HR monitors worn by other walkers. After he completed the cardio component of the FA, he had a 20 minute argument with three of the FACs and...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02626
_________________________________________________________________ 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 | CY2013 | BC 2013 02244
In support of his appeal, the applicant provided an AF Form 108 signed by his medical provider stating that there was a medical condition that precluded him from passing the FA and recommended invalidation of the FA. The applicants last five FA results are as follows: Date Composite Score Rating 24 Jul 13 80.33 Satisfactory *25 Apr 13 26.33 Unsatisfactory 12 Oct 12 82.33 Satisfactory 28 Mar 12 85.44 Satisfactory 30 Dec 11 72.00 Unsatisfactory * Contested FA On 2 Jan 14 a similar request...