Should the APFT scores be normed on factors other than age and gender?

MAJ (Join to see)

As I considered the question, with the changes being pushed down on the military, I wondered "Should there be any normed factors? IF we are going to bring women into combat arms jobs, maybe we need to gender and age from the equation? Can one meet the requirement? Maybe instead of trying to change the factors for the pegs, we need to look at setting standards for the hole we are placing pegs? Make physical standards for the various jobs?

These other factors include things identified in the Triad of Fitness (sleep, nutrition, activity). They also could be things like elevation, pollution, wind speed and direction, temperature, or other environmental conditions.
I live in Ankara, Turkey, where the elevation is about 1100 meters, where pollution is pretty bad, and where its quite windy. I was previously stationed in Cyprus, which has the worst air pollution in Europe. Things like elevation hugely impact run times; in prep for my last APFT, I was struggling to break the 13:36 I needed for 100 points while running in Ankara; I took the AFPT, though, at Ft. Eustis (elevation: 3 meters) and, purely based on elevation change (and maybe pollution and a couple other factors) in literally a couple days dropped more than 30 seconds from my run time.
We live in an age where we can model just about any condition using scientific methods. Should the Army create an algorithm for APFT scores that accounts for more than just age and gender norming? For example, the Army could say a "standard" APFT is administered at sea level, on a perfectly straight and flat 2-mile course, in a location with zero air pollution, no wind, and at, say, a temperature of 62 degrees...and then build an algorithm to norm the score according to differences. We could also add things like: hours of sleep the night prior (with 9 being ideal, for example) and the average number of hours of sleep per day the previous 30 days; a nutrition factor (if a Soldier was forced to eat MREs for a month prior to the APFT, that really isn't fair to the Soldier); etc, etc.
Or is such an approach just "too hard" for the Army, meaning the non-scientific way we evaluate fitness currently is just fine?
I've previously stated that I believed that APFT scores should be required entries on evaluations. My view is shifting: I think now that I believe the Army is right, that the APFT is really just a PASS/FAIL event, and that scores aren't all that important. Maybe the Army should do away with the score concept in favor of simple pass/fail standards normed by age and gender (and maybe other environmental factors)? Especially if we aren't going to incorporate an assessment of environmental factors into scoring the APFT, I believe it should be a PASS/FAIL event and that we should eliminate the score tables in favor of simple PASS/FAIL raw scores normed by age and gender.

is the APFT really broken? why do we strive to make it so? for the last 17 years i have heard how we need to change the APFT but not once have i seen the Army act on fixing the tape test.