Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00330
Original file (BC-2013-00330.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                  DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-00330

	             	  COUNSEL:  NONE

			                             HEARING DESIRED:  NO


________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His 12 Sep 12 Fitness Assessment (FA) be declared void and 
removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS).

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The Fitness Assessement Cell (FAC) Physical Training Leader 
(PTL) who administered his waist measurement was not properly 
trained and he was not informed that a second FAC PTL could 
administer the waist measurement.

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 (E-7).

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.

On 12 Sep 12, the applicant participated in the contested FA, 
attaining a composite score of 86.30.  He did not meet the 
minimum component for the AC measurement, which constituted an 
unsatisfactory assessment.  His AC measurement was 39.50 inches.

On 19 Sep 12, the applicant waived his 42 day conditioning 
period and participated in a retest FA, attaining a composite 
score of 88.50.  His AC measurement was 37 inches. 

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 the applicant failed to 
demonstrate a clear error or injustice.  The applicant has not 
provided sufficient documentation to support his claim.  There 
is no documentation from the FAC team indicating the FAC PTL was 
not properly trained.

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

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 18 Oct 13 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 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 conclusion 
the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice.  
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find 
no basis to recommend granting the requested relief.

________________________________________________________________

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-2013-00330 in Executive Session on 14 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 2 Oct 11 [sic], w/atchs.
	 Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	 Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 17 Sep 13, w/atchs.
	 Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Oct 13.




                                   
                                   Panel Chair




3



DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE 
WASHINGTON DC 

5






Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05000

    Original file (BC 2012 05000.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 | CY2012 | BC-2012-01779

    Original file (BC-2012-01779.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant did not meet the minimum component for the waist measurement and therefore received an unsatisfactory rating for the fitness test. The complete AFPC/DPSIM evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 28 Aug 12 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). The applicant contends that his waist...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03771

    Original file (BC 2013 03771.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03771 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His 18 Jul 13 Fitness Assessment (FA) be declared void and removed from his records. Therefore, in view of the fact the evidence before us indicates the applicant’s AC measurement has never been above 35.5 inches (2006), and his AC measurement was recorded as 32.5 inches during an FA taking place only days after...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05265

    Original file (BC 2012 05265.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05265 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His fitness assessment (FA) score recorded on 19 Jul 12 be removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS). The complete AFPC/DPSIM evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05629

    Original file (BC 2012 05629.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    She was re-measured a week later by a different FAC member [witnessed by the Unit Fitness Program Manager (UFPM)], and her measurements were, height (66 inches) and waist (30.5 inches). DPSIM states that the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence that would indicate the 5 Sep 12 AC measurement did not comply with the Air Force Instruction. The complete DPSIM evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 05794

    Original file (BC 2012 05794.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    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). On 24 Aug 12, an AF Form 469, Duty Limiting Condition Report, was issued which restricted the applicant from performing activities that...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05794

    Original file (BC 2012 05794.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    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). On 24 Aug 12, an AF Form 469, Duty Limiting Condition Report, was issued which restricted the applicant from performing activities that...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01944

    Original file (BC 2013 01944.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05596

    Original file (BC 2012 05596.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05596 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Fitness Assessments (FA), dated 11 Jun 12 and 6 Sep 12, be removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS). While we note the applicant’s stated request to have the entire FA removed, the Air Force office of primary responsibility has...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02277

    Original file (BC 2013 02277.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 24 Apr 13, the applicant participated in the contested FA and attained a composite score of 64.40 unsatisfactory due to failure to achieve minimum requirements on the AC. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit B ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In response to the Air Force evaluation, the applicant submitted; a memorandum from the FAC validating that she in fact asked for a re-tape by another...