RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-01944

			COUNSEL:  NONE

			HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.	The Fitness Assessments (FA), dated 2 Mar 12 and 30 May 12 be 
declared void and removed from the Air Force Fitness Management 
System (AFFMS).

2.	The Referral Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) rendered for 
the period from 18 Mar 11 through 17 Mar 12, as a result of the 
failed FA, be declared void and removed from his records.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He had a medical condition, specifically, hypothyroidism, during 
the contested FA, which precluded him from obtaining a 
satisfactory overall rating, resulting in an unjust referral 
EPR.  He contends hypothyroidism caused him to gain weight and 
as a result, caused him to fail the abdominal circumference (AC) 
portion of the FA.

In support of his contention, he submits a Memorandum for Record 
(MFR)from his Primary Care Manager (PCM) dated 4 Dec 12, a MFR 
from his First Sergeant dated 24 Jul 12, Lab results, his 
contested EPR, and his referral for fitness failure.

The medical condition has been validated through a medical 
evaluation.  His commander submitted the request to remove the 
FA from his record, but it had already been entered into the 
AFFMS.  

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, 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 2 Mar 12, the applicant participated in the first of two 
contested FAs and attained an unsatisfactory composite score of 
60.90.  He was subsequently given a referral EPR due to not 
meeting fitness standards.  The applicant participated in the 
second contested FA on 30 May 12 and attained an unsatisfactory 
composite score of 58.60.   

In a response to the applicant’s appeal, the Fitness Assessment 
Appeals Board (FAAB) directed that the pertinent Air Force 
Fitness Management System (AFFMS) records be updated to reflect 
AC exemption and scores be recalculated accordingly.   A review 
of the Information extracted from the AFFMS indicates the AFFMS 
was updated.  The updated AFFMS record indicates applicant 
continued to achieve unsatisfactory scores due to a composite 
score of 69.5 on both contested FAs.

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

Date 
Composite Score
Rating
5 Nov 13
70.00 
Unsatisfactory
29 May 13
81.5
Satisfactory
27 Jul 12
Exempt
Exempt
*30 May 12
69.5 (corrected)
Unsatisfactory
*2 Mar 12
69.5 (corrected)
Unsatisfactory

* Contested FA

On 16 Dec 13, the Fitness Assessment Appeals Board corrected the 
AFFMS records to reflect the applicant was exempt from the AC 
components of the contested FAs.

In accordance with AFI 36-2905, Fitness Program, to determine 
overall fitness the Air Force uses an overall composite fitness 
score and minimum scores per three component areas:  Aerobic 
Fitness (1.5 mile run), Body Composition (abdominal 
circumference measurement), and Muscular Fitness (number of 
push-ups and sit-ups completed within one minute each).  
Military members receive a composite score on a 0 to 100 scale 
based on the following maximum component scores: 60 points for 
aerobic, 20 points for body composition, 10 points for push-ups 
and 10 points for sit-ups.  To determine individual composite 
fitness scores the Air Force uses age and gender specific 
fitness score charts.  An unsatisfactory is a composite score 
less than 75 and/or one or more component minimums are not met.

Furthermore, Attachment 2, USAF Fitness Test Scoring, of the AFI 
reflects males under the age of 30 must meet minimum value in 
each of the four components, and achieve a composite point total 
greater than 75 points.  The passing minimum component for the 
abdominal circumference (AC) measurement for a male between the 
ages of 30 and 39, is less than or equal to 39 inches.

_______________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial of the applicant’s request and 
states there is no evidence to support removal of the non-exempt 
components from the AFFMS.  When the AFFMS was corrected to 
exempt the AC, the composite score still remained 
unsatisfactory. The applicant provided no supporting 
documentation to authorize removal of the remaining components 
of the test.

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

AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of the applicant’s request to 
remove the contested EPR from his record since he has not 
provided sufficient documentation to prove it was unfairly or 
unjustly rendered.  Moreover, since the FA failures remain, even 
after exempting him from the AC components, there exists no 
basis to void the contested EPR

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

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations, with attachments, were 
forwarded to the applicant 28 Feb 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 opinions and 
recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary 
responsibility and adopt their 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 compelling 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.

________________________________________________________________

Due to the unavailability of XXXXXXXXXXX, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX has 
signed as Acting Panel Chair.  The following members of the 
Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-01944 in Executive 
Session on 21 May 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	XXXXXXXXXXXX, Chair
	XXXXXXXXXXXX, Member
	XXXXXXXXXXXX, Member

The following documentary evidence was:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 15 Apr 13, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 25 Sep 13, w/atchs.
	Exhibit C.	Memorandum, AFPC/DPSID, not dated.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Feb 14



	
					Acting Panel Chair