RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00191
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His sit-up component score on his 4 Nov 12 Fitness Assessment
(FA) be changed from 25 to 45, which will give him a passing
score in the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS).
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He exceeded the minimum number of sit-ups required during his
FA. The count of 25 sit-ups is erroneous. The score of 25
gives him a failure and a Letter of Counseling (LOC) from his
commander.
He has never failed to complete the maximum sit-ups or push-ups
during any of his FAs. He has witnesses who watched him perform
his test and support his claim of performing more than 25 sit-
ups.
In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his
Individual Fitness Assessment History and an email from a
witness.
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 master sergeant.
The applicants last seven FA scores are as follows:
DATE SCORE SIT-UPS/SCORE
5 May 13 SATISFACTORY 46/10.00
* 4 Nov 12 UNSATISFACTORY 25/0.00
5 May 12 SATISFACTORY 50/10.00
15 Oct 11 SATISFACTORY 50/10.00
12 Mar 11 SATISFACTORY 48/9.50
10 Apr 10 GOOD 50/10.00
15 Mar 09 GOOD 50/10.00
*Contested FA score.
On 6 Nov 13, the Fitness Assessment Appeals Board (FAAB)
disapproved the applicants request to remove his FA dated 4 Nov
12. The specific reason for denial was there was insufficient
evidence to support the claim (Exhibit C).
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial. DPSIM states that the applicant
received a score of 25 in the sit-ups component and the minimum
sit-up requirement for the applicants age is 28. The evidence
provided indicates that a witness supports the applicants claim
of performing more than the official count of 25 sit-ups on the
day of the FA. While the applicant claims the count of 25 is
erroneous, he does not specifically indicate why he felt there
was such a large difference between his personal count and that
by the FA personnel administering the test. He does not
indicate if he believes the score was simply entered incorrectly
in AFFMS or that the tester did not apply multiple sit-up
attempts towards the final count. DPSIM finds little evidence
to support the possibility of an administrative error in
entering the score into AFFMS, aside from the witness reference
to an inadvertent score which she herself stated the score sheet
reflected 25.
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.
________________________________________________________________
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-2013-00191 in Executive Session on 9 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 11 Dec 12, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 24 Sep 13, w/atch.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 6 Nov 13.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Dec 13.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02738
As a result we have concluded that the recorded AC scores are not an accurate reflection of applicant's abdominal circumference. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation, with attachment, was forwarded to the applicant on 6 Dec 13 for review and comment within 30 days. The applicant has provided documentation validating he had a medical condition that affected his ability to pass the AC...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05369
DPSIM states that the applicant provided a memorandum from the Director, Fitness and Sports Complex at Kadena Air Base, Japan which states her staff was aware of the manufacturers guidance that HR monitors can cause erratic readings and have previously separated walkers after crossing the finish line to keep their distance to avoid syncing with other HR monitors worn by other walkers. After he completed the cardio component of the FA, he had a 20 minute argument with three of the FACs and...
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 02621
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02621 XXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Fitness Assessment (FA), dated 23 May 13 be corrected to reflect a 1.5 mile run time of 14:00 minutes in the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS). The other participant had a recorded time of 13:57, yet he was given a time of...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02767
In support of his request, the applicant provides a Memorandum from his medical provider dated 19 Mar 13 indicating he had a medical condition that precluded his passing the non-exempt portion of the test. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02179
________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She received an unsatisfactory score due to Fitness Assessment Cell (FAC) misinterpreted the Italian handwriting of the FAC when recording the number of push-ups performed. The applicant did not provide an official statement from the FAC stating there was an error. On 6 Nov 13 a similar request was considered and denied by the Fitness Assessments Appeals Board (FAAB) due to Insufficient evidence to...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01087
The medical condition has been validated through a medical evaluation. The applicants last eight FA results are as follows: Date Composite Score Rating 26 Nov 13 79.00 Satisfactory 26 Jul 13 77.20 Unsatisfactory 1 Mar 13 EXEMPT EXEMPT 31 Dec 12 23.75 Unsatisfactory *10 Sept 12 64.67 Unsatisfactory 27 Feb 12 78.30 Satisfactory *15 Nov 11 68.20 Unsatisfactory *12 May 11 63.00 Unsatisfactory * Contested FA In accordance with AFI 36-2905, Fitness Program, if an Airman becomes injured or ill...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03220
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03220 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Fitness Assessments (FAs) dated 29 Oct 10, 28 Oct 11, and 16 Nov 12 be declared void and removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS). The applicant clarifies in his response to the Air Force Evaluation that the FA he is...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01762
On 24 Nov 2013, a similar request was considered and denied by the Fitness Assessments Appeals Board (FAAB) due to Insufficient evidence to support contention. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial of removal of the 4 Oct 11 FA, due to insufficient evidence to support the applicants contention. Her records were administratively corrected to show that she was exempt from participating in the 7 Feb 12 FA, due to...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01360
On 24 Nov 2013, a similar request was considered and denied by the Fitness Assessments Appeals Board (FAAB) due to Insufficient evidence to support contention. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial of removal of the 4 Oct 11 FA, due to insufficient evidence to support the applicants contention. Her records were administratively corrected to show that she was exempt from participating in the 7 Feb 12 FA, due to...