RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-01755

	XXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  NONE

			HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1. The Fitness Assessment (FA) dated 6 Sep 13 be declared void and removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS).

2. The Referral Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) dated 14 Nov 12 be declared void and removed from his personnel record. 

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Due to exercise induced asthma diagnosed on 14 Jan 13, he was unable to successfully obtain a minimum passing score on the contested FA.

In support of the appeal, the applicant submits copies of his medical records.

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 (E-4).

On 6 Sep 12, the applicant participated in the contested FA and attained an unsatisfactory score (68.50) completing all four components.  This was his third failure in a 24 month period.

On 17 Oct 12, the squadron commander denied award of the Air Force Good Conduct Medal to the applicant, as a result of receiving a Letter of Reprimand from the Commander for failing 3 FAs in a 24-month period.  As a result, a new start date of 12 Sep 12 was established for AFGCM eligibility.

According to an SF 600, Chronological Record of Medical Care, dated 25 Oct 12, the applicant saw his Primary Care Manager (PCM) concerning shortness of breath during exercise.

On 31 Oct 12, the applicant was demoted from staff sergeant (E-5) to Senior Airman (E-4) effective 29 Oct 12, under the provisions of AFI 36-2503, paragraph 3.3, Failure to Fulfill NCO Responsibilities.

On 14 Nov 12, the applicant received a “Directed by Commander” referral EPR marked “Does Not Meet” in Section III, Block 3.

According to an SF 600, Chronological Record of Medical Care, dated, 10 Dec 12, the applicant saw his PCM for a follow-up concerning shortness of breath during exercise.

According to an SF 600, Chronological Record of Medical Care, dated 16 Jan 13, the applicant was examined by an off-base pulmonology specialist on 13 Jan 13.

According to an SF 600, Chronological Record of Medical Care, dated 17 Jan 13, the applicant saw a PCM for a follow up concerning shortness of breath during exercise, during which he told the PCM that an off-base pulmonologist diagnosed him with exercise induced asthma.

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 seek medical care until one month after the FA.

The applicant’s last eight FA results are as follows:

Date 
Composite Score
Rating
6 Jan 2014
78.00
Satisfactory
6 Jun 13
83.10
Satisfactory
4 Dec 12
76.70
Satisfactory
* 6 Sep 12
68.50
Unsatisfactory
6 Feb 12
82.40
Satisfactory
21 Dec 11
31.70
Unsatisfactory
22 Jun 11
78.60
Satisfactory
21 Mar 11
67.80
Unsatisfactory* Contested FA

In accordance with guidance at the time of contested FA, AFI 36-2905_AFGM4 (26 Jun 12), 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 evaluated at the Medical Treatment Facility (MTF) but his/her test will still count unless rendered invalid by the Unit Commander. For ARC, Airmen will have the option of providing the ARC Fitness Program Medical Liaison Officer (MLO) with medical documentation from their Personal Care Physician to include diagnosis, prognosis period and type of physical limitations or restrictions.”

In accordance with guidance at the time of contested FA, AFI 36-2905_AFGM4 (26 Jun 12), Attachment 1, Section 10, Paragraph a, “If the medical evaluation validates the illness/injury, the Unit Commander may invalidate the test results. The Airman will then be required to retest within 5 duty days or when capable based on the recommendations of the medical provider/MLO and the Exercise Physiologist (EP). If an AF Form 422 is required, an additional 7 days will be allowed for the AF Form 422 to be generated and provided. For non-AGR ARC, Airmen will be required to retest the next date they are in appropriate military duty status and official FAs are being conducted.”

In accordance with guidance at the time of contested FA, AFI 36-2905 (1 Jul 10), Paragraph 2.3.2., “All members must complete the FSQ prior to FA (Attachment 4).”

In accordance with guidance at the time of contested FA, AFI 36-2905 (1 Jul 10), Paragraph 2.3.2.1, “The FSQ should be completed no earlier than 30 calendar days (90 days for ARC), but NLT 7 days prior to FA to provide time for medical evaluation, when indicated. Note: Failure to complete FSQ does not invalidate the FA.”

In accordance with guidance at the time of contested FA, AFI 36-2905 (1 Jul 10), Paragraph 2.3.2.2, “A medical provider must evaluate all members with health issues identified on the FSQ prior to the FA. Member must notify the UFPM of the assessment/training clearance status from the provider. The provider or ARC MLO completes the bottom portion of the FSQ or the Medical Clearance Letter (MCL) if the member has no limitations (Attachment 10 or 11) and an AF Form 469, if applicable.”

In accordance with guidance at the time of contested FA, AFI 36-2905 (1 Jul 10), Attachment 4, Fitness Screening Questionnaire:  
“1. Have you experienced any of the symptoms/problems listed below and not been medically evaluated and cleared for unrestricted participation in a physical training program?
- Unexplained chest discomfort with or without exertion
- Unusual or unexplained shortness of breath
- Dizziness, fainting, or blackouts associated with exertion
- Other medical problems that may prevent you from safely participating in this test
     - Yes: Stop. Notify your UFPM and contact your PCP/MLO for evaluation/ recommendations (or for ARC, contact the MLO for Duty Limiting Conditions (DLC) documentation and referral to PCP).”

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial of the contested FA removal and states, in part, the applicant did not provide evidence of his exercised induced asthma diagnosis from an off-base pulmonologist.  The applicant also indicated that he noticed shortness of breath preparing for the FA but did not go see his primary care physician as required by the FA Questionnaire, question 1, “have you experienced any unusual or unexplained shortness of breath.”

AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of the applicant’s request to remove the contested EPR, dated 14 Nov 12, from his personnel records and states, in part, the applicant did not provide evidence to prove the condition affected his contested FA failure.  As such, they conclude that it was the applicant’s failure to maintain fitness standards that caused the contested report to be referred, noting that six months prior to the contested FA, he  passed a FA with a score of 82.40.

Air Force policy is that an evaluation report is accurate as written when it becomes a matter of records and is considered a representation of the rating chain’s best judgment at the time it is rendered.  To effectively challenge an evaluation, it is necessary to hear from all members of the rating chain.  The applicant has failed to provide any information from all the rating officials on the contested report.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluations, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations, with attachments, were forwarded to the applicant on 12 Mar 14 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 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.  While the applicant has provided medical records indicating a medical condition, he has not met his burden of proving the contested FA should be removed from his records. In this respect, we note the applicant’s submission does not contain sufficient documentation to include; a Medical Deterimination letter from his medical provider; support from his commander requesting the FA be invalidated; AF Form 422 exempting him from the contested FA; or the Fitness Screening Questionnaire he was required to complete prior to participating in the assessment. 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 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-2013-01755 in Executive Session on 30 Apr 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	XXXXXXXXXX, Chair
	XXXXXXXXXX, Vice Chair
	XXXXXXXXXX, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Apr 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 6 Dec 13, w/atchs.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Mar 14.




                                   XXXXXXXXXX
                                   Chair