Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01644
Original file (BC 2013 01644 .txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-01664

	XXXXXX	COUNSEL:  NONE

			HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The cardio (3-Mile Walk) component of the Fitness Assessment (FA), dated 25 Mar 10 be removed and the FA, dated 2 Sep 10 be declared void and removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS).
________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He had a medical condition, specifically lower back pain that exempted him from walking and running extended periods of time.  This condition precluded him from passing the 3-mile walk and obtaining an overall satisfactory rating on the FA dated, 25 Mar 10. In this respect he should have never had to retest and take the FA dated, 2 Sep 10, which in turn resulted in an overall unsatisfactory rating.   

In support of his appeal the applicant submits; AF FM 422, Certification of Air Force Member’s Qualification Status; two AF FM 469s, Duty Limiting Condition Reports; and several DD FM 1351-2s, Travel Vouchers.  These documents indicate that the applicant had a medical condition which should have exempted him from the cardio component of the FA, dated 25 Mar 10 and would have prevented all subsequent actions, to include the 2 Sep 2010 FA failure. 
  
Furthermore, after the applicant failed the first contested FA, he was enrolled in the Fitness Improvement Program (FIP) and IAW the AFI should retest within 90 days of the failure. However, on 18 Apr 10 the member was deployed until 8 Jul 10, which placed him outside the 90 day window for retest.  During the deployment and in accordance with the AFI, he was exempted from having a current FA score.  In this respect, when the member returned from his deployment he was considered “Not Current,” but IAW AFI 36-2905, “is allowed 42 days after his return to train and is then required to complete the FA.”  The member contends that he should have been scheduled to retest on 21 Aug 2010 (42 days after his return from deployment), but was scheduled for a 2 Sep 2010 FA instead.

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 Master Sergeant (E-7).

On 15 Jan 2010, an AF Form 469, Duty Limiting Condition Report, was initiated from his Medical Provider with the following recommendations; no running over 100 yards; no pushing, pulling, lifting over 20lbs; no repetitive bending at the waist; and no prolonged standing, marching or walking over 20 minutes.  The release date for the recommendations was 12 Feb 10.

On 4 Mar 2010, an AF Form 469 Duty Limiting Condition Report, was initiated from his Medical Provider and recommended no running more than a 1/2 mile at any one time. The release date for the recommendations was 1 Apr 10

On 23 Mar 2010 an AF Form 422, Notification of Air Force Member’s Qualification Status, was issued exempting the applicant from the 1.5 mile run and cycle ergometry portions of the cardio component.  However, he was cleared to test on the 3-mile walk, as well as, the push-up, sit-up, and AC measurement components.  The release date for recommendations was 1 Apr 2010. 

On 25 Mar 2010, the applicant participated in the contested FA, attaining a composite score of 64.00, resulting in a “poor” assessment. 

Examiners Note: The AF Form 469 is used by the Air Force medical community to notify a commander of medical concerns not to remove a member from unit fitness training or testing.  The AF Form 422 is used by an exercise physiologist to prescribe fitness recommendations and FA exemptions. IAW AFI 10-203, Para 2.7.5.1 "AF Form 469 will not be used to remove a member from unit fitness training or testing. Members with a functional limitation which impacts unit fitness greater than 30 days or members with an impending fitness test in less than 30 days will report to the Fitness Program Manager (FPM) at the Health and Wellness Center (HAWC) for testing exemption and exercise prescription evaluation. AF Form 422A will be used to document exercise program evaluations performed at the HAWC by the FPM." 

An unsigned, DD Form 1351-2, Travel Voucher, dated 18 Apr to 27 Jun (Year Not Listed) was provided by the applicant.  The travel voucher indicates a possible deployment from Shaw AFB to Al Dhafra Air Base. 
 
On 2 Sep 2010, the applicant participated in the contested FA, attaining a composite score of 61.90, resulting in a “poor” assessment. 

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 EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial of the applicant’s request to correct or remove the contested FAs from AFFMS, due to the lack of supporting evidence.  DPSIM comments that the documentation provided by the applicant did not exempt him from completing the 3-mile walk on 25 Mar 10. Furthermore, the applicant was eligible to re-test on 2 Sep 2010, since it had been more than 42 days from his return on deployment.   

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B.
________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

He cannot control how local policy issues the AF FM 469s and AF FM 422s and was not cleared to do any form of physical fitness until the Exercise Program Manager wrote the AF FM 422, which was only 2 days prior to the FA dated 25 Mar 10.  Furthermore, the AF FM 469 states “no running greater than a half a mile,” for which the applicant contends if he can’t run a half mile, then it is reasonable to assume that he can’t successfully pass a 3-mile walk test, especially in the 2-day time period we was given to prepare.  Therefore, he requests that the cardio portion of the 25 Mar 10 FA be removed, which in-turn would prevent the domino effect of his FA failure on 2 Sep 10, since he would have been current on his FA prior to his deployment.     

A complete copy of the applicant’s response 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.

3.	Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of 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 that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  In this respect, we considered the AF Form 469, which clearly states no running and the AF FM 422 that confirms he was on a profile for the 25 Mar 10 FA, but nothing indicates that he was exempt from the 3-mile walk.  In regards to the 2 Sep 10 FA, we note the unsigned, DD Form 1351-2, Travel Voucher, dated 18 Apr to 27 Jun (Year Not Listed) indicating a possible deployment from Shaw Air Force Base to Al Dhafra Air Base; however the timeframe of when the applicant returned and the date of the contested FA, places the applicant well outside the 42-day acclimation period and did not exempt him from the test.  Furthermore, we note the applicant’s response to the Air Force evaluation and his contention that his medical condition and the 2-day time period to prepare precluded him from passing the FA. However, the submission does not contain any additional documentation from his medical provider stating that his medical condition prevented him from passing the 3-mile walk or the Fitness Screening Questionnaire he was required to complete prior to participating in the FAs, which would have indicated whether he had a “health condition not addressed in a Physical Profile (AF Form 422).” Moreover, the applicant’s submission does not contain support from his commander requesting the FAs be invalidated.  Should the applicant provide such evidence, we would be willing to reconsider his request.  However, 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-01644 in Executive Session on 27 Mar 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	XXXXX, Chair
	XXXXX, Vice Chair
	XXXXX, Member


The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-01644 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 24 Mar 13, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 18 Dec 13, w/atchs.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Jan 14.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, dated 7 Feb 14.




                                   XXXXX
                                   Chair






Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01664

    Original file (BC 2013 01664.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 04605

    Original file (BC 2013 04605.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 05833

    Original file (BC 2013 05833.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    After the FA the applicant visited his medical provider and was given a corrected profile. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial of the applicant’s 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05279

    Original file (BC 2013 05279.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 25 Oct 13 she received an updated AF Form 469, stating that she was exempt from the cardio component of the FA. The applicant's AF Form 469 shows the cardio limitations expired on 23 Sep 13, which would have allowed the applicant to complete the cardio component of the FA. The applicant did not provide an updated AF Form 469 to show the exemption expired on a later date.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01591

    Original file (BC 2013 01591.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 | CY2013 | BC 2013 04890

    Original file (BC 2013 04890.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04890 XXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Fitness Assessment (FA) dated 28 Aug 13 be declared void and removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS). Also, there was no indication the commander wanted to invalidate the Fitness Assessment.” In accordance with (IAW)...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02388

    Original file (BC-2012-02388.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    ________________________________________________________________ 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 01465

    Original file (BC 2013 01465.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01465 XXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Fitness Assessment (FA), dated 27 Sep 12 be declared void and removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS). On 22 Jan 14 a similar request was considered and denied by the Fitness Assessments Appeals Board (FAAB) due to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02951

    Original file (BC 2013 02951.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant provided documentation validating her medical condition including; an AF FM 469, Duty Limiting Condition Report; an AF FM 422 Notification of Air Force Member’s Qualification Status; a medical evaluation letter signed by her medical provider; and her Enlisted Performance Evaluation (EPR) with a close-out date of 1 Apr 13, which indicates she “Meets” the fitness standard at the close-out of her report. The applicant’s last 5 FA results are as follows: Date Composite...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02467

    Original file (BC 2013 02467.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 2 Jan 14, the request was considered and denied by the Fitness Assessment Appeals Board (FAAB), on the basis of “Insufficient evidence; specifically AF Form 422 and medical documentation from an Air Force doctor.” In accordance with (IAW) guidance at the time of contested FA, AFI 36-2905_ Fitness Program AFGM5 (3 Jan 13), Attachment 1, Section 10, “If an Airman becomes injured or ill during the FA and is unable to complete all required components, he/she will have the option of being...