RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04694
XXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The Fitness Assessment (FA), dated 6 Dec 12 be removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS).
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His AF form 469 Duty Limiting Report unjustly exempted him from preforming push-ups due to back problems. This resulted in him being unable to attain a satisfactory composite score on the contested assessment. A later AF 469 allowed him to participate in push-ups and he passed a subsequent FA.
The applicants complete submission including: MFR fitness assessment letter, AF 469 for time period of assessment, AF 469 for assessment with passing score, medical documentation, and PT score sheet history is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently serving in the regular Air Force in the rank of Senior Master Sergeant (E-8).
On 6 Dec 12 the applicant completed the contested FA with an unsatisfactory composite score of 63.00. He was exempted from all but the the abdominal circumference (AC) component.
On 17 Dec 13, the applicants request was considered and denied by the Fitness Assessment Appeals Board (FAAB) citing that the member was tested within his AF 469 profile.
In accordance with (IAW) guidance at the time of contested FA, AFI 36-2905_ Fitness Program AFGM3 (3 Jan 12), 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 EP/FPM. Unless member is given a composite exemption, member will continue to prepare for and be assessed on non-exempt components of the FA.
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial of the applicants request to remove the contested FA, citing a lack documentation indicating the applicant should have been allowed to complete the push-up component.
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, with attachment, was forwarded to the applicant on 21 Feb 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 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 documentation confirming a medical condition, he has not met his burden of proving how this condition precluded him from successfully completing the contested FA. In this respect, we note the AF Form 469 and AF Form 422 which indicate a medical condition exempted the applicant from the push-up component of the contested FA and he has provided no documentation that establishes that he should have been allowed to perform this component. Therefore, he tested within the limits of his profile and per AFI he was correctly assessed on the non-exempt components of the FA. Should the applicant provide evidence to the contrary, 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-2013-04694 in Executive Session on 30 Apr 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. XXXXXXXX, Panel Chair
Ms. XXXXXXXX, Member
Ms. XXXXXXXX, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 29 Jul 13, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 4 Dec 13, w/atchs.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Feb 14.
XXXXXXXX
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01550
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03517
________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She sent medical documentation to her medical unit prior to the contested FA that should have exempted her from components of the assessment. On 19 Apr 13, the applicant provided a Fitness Screening Questionnaire Memorandum for Medical Clearance signed by her medical provider and indicating that she was medically cleared to test on the cardio component (1-mile walk test) and the abdominal...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01174
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01174 XXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Fitness Assessments (FAs), dated 14 July 2011, 02 Feb 2012, and 31 Mar 2012 be declared void and removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS). The applicants last five FA results are as follows: Date Composite...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04890
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 | CY2013 | BC 2013 04441
On 20 Feb 14, a similar request was considered and denied by the Fitness Assessment Appeals Board (FAAB), stating there was not enough or specific details of the medical condition provided from the applicants medical provider. A list of the applicants last 10 FAs is as follows: Date Composite Score Sit-Ups Rating 5 Feb 14 82.00 Exempt Satisfactory 19 Jun 13 79.00 Exempt Satisfactory 25 Feb 13 85.00 Exempt Satisfactory *27 Dec 12 23.50 39/0.00 Unsatisfactory 25 Jun...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05000
DPSIM further recommends the fitness assessments dated 27 Sep 11, 30 Dec 11, and 28 Mar 12 be corrected to reflect the applicant was exempt from the waist measurement component of these FAs. The complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He was told he had to participate in the abdominal circumference for the 29 Mar 11 FA, not knowing there was an AF Form 422...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04682
The applicants last 5 FA results are as follows: Date Composite Score Cardio Rating 30 Oct 13 82.75 Exempt Satisfactory 28 Aug 13 32.60 32/0.00(1-mile walk) Unsatisfactory *13 Aug 13 71.75 Exempt Unsatisfactory 13 Feb 13 87.00 Exempt Satisfactory 7 Aug 12 80.20 15:52/44.10 Satisfactory * Contested FA A similar request was denied by the Fitness Assessment Appeals Board (FAAB) on 14 Feb 14 on the basis of no letter from the commander to invalidate the Fitness Assessment. Also, no AF Form...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05279
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 04714
He also provided a memorandum from the medical provider dated 01 Jul 13, that validated he had a medical condition that precluded him from passing the 19 Jun 13 FA and then was issued an AF Form 469. In regards to the FA dated 19 Jun 13, we recognize the letter from his medical provider, which states that a medical condition prevented him from passing. Furthermore, the applicant contends that since the FAs dated 31 July 12 and 28 Dec 12 now reflect a passing score in AFFMS and the FAs...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04717
A list of the applicants last 5 FAs is as follows: Date Composite Score Cardio Rating *22 Jul 13 18.88 35/0.00 Unsatisfactory 25 Mar 13 59.63 38/47.70 Unsatisfactory 10 Sep 12 79.78 39/49.80 Satisfactory 24 Feb 12 78.33 41/47.20 Satisfactory 19 Aug 11 86.00 44/52.40 Satisfactory *Contested FA An AF Form 108, dated 4 Sep 13, signed by his medical provider, states the member has been evaluated and has a medical condition precluding the achievement of a passing score. On 20 Feb 14, a similar...