RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-04038

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Fitness Assessments (FA) scores, dated 26 May 11, 26 Sep 12, 
29 Nov 12, and 4 Apr 13, be removed from his records. 


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His Primary Care Physician (PCP) determined that he had a heart 
condition that prevented him from passing the contested FAs; 
therefore, he should have been exempted from the components he 
failed.  

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 staff sergeant (E-5).

On 26 May 11, the applicant participated in the contested FA and 
attained an overall composite score of 35.60, resulting in an 
unsatisfactory rating.

On 26 Sept 12, the applicant participated in the contested FA 
and attained an overall composite score of 30.00, resulting in 
an unsatisfactory rating.

On 29 Nov 12, the applicant participated in the contested FA and 
attained an overall composite score of 28.60, resulting in an 
unsatisfactory rating.  During this FA, the applicant did not 
complete the cardio component.

On 29 Nov 12, the applicant reported to the Emergency Room (ER); 
his discharge diagnosis was chest pain, palpitations, and 
exertional headache.  The ER found nothing that required 
hospitalization; however, he was given two day release from his 
normal activities and provided with instructions to follow up at 
the Military Treatment Facility (MTF) the next day.

On 4 Dec 12, the applicant was evaluated by a civilian medical 
provider for palpitations and atypical chest pain.  It was also 
noted that the applicant was a cigarette smoker with no previous 
cardiac history.  The applicant’s stress echocardiogram was 
negative for ischemia, and the applicant was strongly encouraged 
to begin smoking cessation as it is a cardiac risk factor.  

On 17 Dec 12, the applicant reported palpitations but indicated 
they were better.  The provider indicated the applicant’s 
palpitations were not life threatening.  The applicant requested 
a medication to help suppress them and was prescribed medication 
to take at bedtime.  A two-month follow up was recommended. 

On 19 Feb 13, the applicant denied recurrent palpitations since 
starting the medication the provider had prescribed.  Smoking 
cessation was strongly encouraged.  Annual cardiovascular follow 
up was recommended in the absence of symptoms. 

On 4 Apr 13, the applicant participated in the contested FA and 
attained an overall composite score of 35.80, resulting in an 
unsatisfactory rating.

On 1 May 13, the civilian medical provider diagnosed the 
applicant with Ventricular Tachycardia and prescribed medication 
to aide in controlling his heart rate.  The medical provider 
also indicated this condition will affect the applicant’s 
performance during high demand activities.  It was advised that 
the applicant be observed during such activities. 

On 27 Jun 13, the applicant’s military medical provider issued 
an AF Form 469, Duty Limiting Condition Report, which indicated 
the applicant was restricted from performing the cardio 
component (1.5 mile run or 1 mile walk) of the FA.  

On 8 Jul 13, the applicant’s medical provider performed an 
evaluation and records review to determine if there were medical 
conditions that precluded the applicant from achieving a passing 
score on the contested FAs.  The provider determined the 
applicant had a medical condition that precluded him from 
achieving a passing score in a non-exempt portion of the 
contested FAs.

On 26 Feb 14, the Fitness Assessment Appeals Board (FAAB) 
corrected the applicant’s records to reflect that he was exempt 
from the cardio component of the contested FAs; however, said 
corrections had no impact on the overall rating of the 26 May 
11, 26 Sep 12, and 29 Nov 12 FAs as they all remain 
unsatisfactory; however, the administrative correction did 
result in the 4 Apr 13 FA being a satisfactory rating.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of 
primary responsibility (OPR) which is included at Exhibit B. 


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial, due to lack of supporting evidence 
to substantiate an error or injustice.  While the applicant 
provided a medical memorandum and the medical provider stated 
that he had a documented medical condition that precluded him 
from achieving a passing score on the FA, there was no evidence 
of what the applicant's limitations were for each fitness 
assessment.  The applicant's AF Form 469 that was provided only 
covers the limitations between 27 June 2013 and 01 October 2013 
The applicant provided a letter from his medical provider 
indicating that he "had a documented medical condition that 
precluded him from achieving a passing score in a non-exempt 
portion of the FA test" for all four FAs in question, and the 
applicant provided an AF Form 469, Duty Limiting Condition 
Report, dated 27 Jun 2013, only restricting the applicant from 
running and walking.  However, because AFI 36-2905, Fitness, 
paragraph 4.2.2 "Providers will list physical limitations on the 
AF Form 469; when physical limitations preclude the member from 
participating in fitness activities for greater than 30 days 
and/or accomplishing the FA, the member will follow local policy 
to obtain an exercise prescription and determination of FA 
exemption from the Exercise Physiologist.  Unless member is 
given a composite exemption, member will continue to prepare for 
and be assessed on non-exempt components of the FA." and 
paragraph 4.2.2.2, "the provider will specify the length of time 
required for physical limitations."  

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


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 12 May 14 for review and comment within 30 days.  
As of this date, no response has been received by this office 
(Exhibit C).


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 
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 (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the 
basis for our determination the applicant is not the victim of an 
error or injustice.  Therefore, we find no basis to recommend granting 
any relief beyond that rendered administratively.


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-2013-04038 in Executive Session on 24 Sep 14, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Ms., Panel Chair
	Ms., Member
	Mr., Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 Aug 13, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 10 Mar 14, w/atchs.
Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 May 14.