Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01782
Original file (BC 2013 01782.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
		RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01782
			COUNSEL:  NONE
			HEARING DESIRED:  YES

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Fitness Assessment (FA) dated 27 Dec 12, be removed from the 
Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS).

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was deployed on Contingency Exercise Deployment (CED) orders 
from 23 May 12 through 16 Nov 12. 

According to AFI 36-2905, Fitness Program, Paragraph 21, all 
personnel who are deployed/on Temporary Duty (TDY) for greater 
than 30 consecutive days will be given a 42-day acclimatization 
period starting the date they arrive back at home station prior 
to taking their FA.  

He tested on the 41st day at the request of his supervisor to 
avoid the New Year’s Holiday weekend.  He was not aware early 
testing required the commander’s approval.  A commander’s 
approval letter was not requested or granted for him to test 
early.

In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his 
deployment orders, travel voucher, and a memorandum of 
counseling regarding his referral Enlisted Performance Report 
(EPR) and Physical Training (PT) failure.

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.  

The applicant’s last seven FA scores are as follows:

	DATE	SCORE

	27 Mar 13	EXCELLENT
*	27 Dec 12	UNSATISFACTORY
	21 Dec 11	SATISFACTORY
	 2 Jun 11	SATISFACTORY
	31 Jan 11	UNSATISFACTORY
	29 Jun 10	GOOD

*Contested FA score.

On 6 Nov 13, the Fitness Assessment Appeals Board (FAAB) 
disapproved the applicant’s request to remove his FA dated 27 
Dec 12.  The reason for denial was the FAAB did not feel one 
additional day would have made a difference on his AC. (Exhibit 
C)

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial.  DPSIM states that the evidence 
provided is insufficient to support the applicant’s claim.  The 
AFI does not require the commander’s approval for early testing 
while on the 42-day acclimatization period from deployment.  Nor 
has the applicant shown evidence that he was forced to take his 
FA on the 42nd (sic) day of the acclimatization period.  

AFI 36-2905, Fitness Program, Air Force Guidance Memorandum 
(AFGM) 4, paragraph 1.21.8., “Ensures prior exempted members 
returning from deployment are assessed after a period of 
acclimatization (42 days from return to home station for Regular 
Air Force members) unless member requests to assess earlier.”  

On 27 Dec 13, the applicant took his FA and received a score of 
70.00 (Unsatisfactory).  The applicant failed his FA due to not 
meeting the minimum requirement on his abdominal circumference. 

The complete DPSIM evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit B.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 6 Dec 13, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to 
the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).  
As of this date, this office has received no response.

________________________________________________________________

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.  Therefore, in the 
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to 
recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not 
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel 
will materially add to our understanding of the issue involved.  
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably 
considered.

________________________________________________________________

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 Docket Number    
BC-2013-01782 in Executive Session on 27 Jan 14, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Apr 13, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 26 Sep 13, w/atch.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 6 Nov 13.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Dec 13.




				
				Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02382

    Original file (BC 2013 02382.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Members must test by the last day of the month, six calendar months following the previous passing test (e.g., if member tested on 15 April, then member must retest on/before 31 October of the same year.” With a RNLTD date of 30 May 11, the applicant was not required to test prior to his scheduled FA and was allowed 42 days after the RNLTD date to test, but was not required to do so. DPSIM concludes that the contested FA is a legitimate unsatisfactory score, in accordance with AFI 36-2905,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01644

    Original file (BC 2013 01644 .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 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 03249

    Original file (BC 2013 03249.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The FAAB removed the duplicate FA, dated 21 Jan 07 from the AFFMS but found insufficient evidence to warrant removal of the FAs, dated 15 Jul 12 and 10 Feb 13, and denied this portion of the request. The applicant’s last nine FA results are as follows: Date Days Since Last Test Composite Score Rating 9 Feb 14 62 46.90 Unsatisfactory 8 Dec 13 146 72.80 Unsatisfactory 14 Jul 13 69 7.50 Unsatisfactory 5 May 13 83 67.90 Unsatisfactory *10 Feb 13 27 46.90 Unsatisfactory 13 Jan...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-05052

    Original file (BC-2011-05052.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. He was clearly not afforded the time allowed to acclimatize after his arrival in Korea as the AFI directs before being scheduled for his FA, thus,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-00021

    Original file (BC-2012-00021.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibits C, D, E, and G. ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial of the applicant’s request to remove his 19 Feb 2010 FA from the AFFMS. DPSIM states the applicant is requesting his FA dated 19 Feb 2010 be removed from the AFFMS. The complete DPSID evaluation, with...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03075

    Original file (BC 2013 03075.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    A list of the applicant’s FAs since she entered the service is as follows: Date Composite Score Sit-Ups Rating 3 Jul 13 75.67 Exempt Satisfactory *15 Apr 13 81.00 25/0.00 Unsatisfactory 23 Nov 12 87.10 38/6.00 Satisfactory 16 Apr 12 84.10 42/7.50 Satisfactory *Contested FA On 16 Dec 13, a similar request was considered and denied by the Fitness Assessments Appeals Board (FAAB), on the basis that, “The applicant’s injury was validated by the applicant’s medical provider, but there was no...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02087

    Original file (BC 2013 02087.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 02272

    Original file (BC 2013 02272.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02272 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Fitness Assessment (FA), dated 30 Aug 12 be declared void and removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS). We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01550

    Original file (BC 2013 01550.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01550 XXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Fitness Assessment (FA), dated 19 Dec 12 and a duplicate FA entry dated 1 Sep 10 be removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS). He received an AF Form 422, Notification of Air Force Member's Qualification Status, dated 9...