RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00591 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The duplicate and erroneous Fitness Assessments (FA) dated 27 June 2006 be removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS). APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: When the error in his FA occurred the PT monitor tried to make the correction by reentering the correct score twice and removing the false score; however, the correction could not be made. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of major. The applicant’s FA history scores are as follows: COMPOSITE DATE SCORE RATING * 27 June 2006 78.45 GOOD * 27 June 2006 78.45 GOOD * 27 June 2006 71.40 MARGINAL 30 May 2007 84.50 GOOD 29 May 2008 82.70 GOOD 15 May 2009 79.40 GOOD 20 May 2010 79.25 GOOD 29 November 2010 85.30 SATISFACTORY 26 May 2011 88.40 SATISFACTORY 17 November 2011 84.80 SATISFACTORY 17 May 2012 87.50 SATISFACTORY 8 November 2012 91.60 EXCELLENT 30 January 2014 88.70 SATISFACTORY 9 July 2014 90.10 EXCELLENT *Contested FA scores. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial. DPSIM states they have not found any documentation showing which FA entry from 27 June 2006 is correct. Also, IAW AFI 36-2905, dated 21 October 2013, any military member can appeal his/her FA via Wing Appeal and subsequently through the AF Fitness Assessment Appeals Board (FAAB), within two years of discovering an error/injustice. In this case, the applicant’s DD Form 149 was signed after 21 October 2013; the appeal has not been considered by his Wing commander, nor has it been reviewed by the FAAB. Therefore, the applicant’s request has not been submitted IAW current Air Force guidance. The duplicate entry from this date can/should be removed regardless of the disposition of this board. (Triplicate entries from 30 May 2007 were removed; this was a separate issue and was not referenced in the BCMR.) There is no documentation showing which score from 27 June 2006 is correct; a lack of information in AFFMS is not sufficient evidence to remove a score. Additionally, the applicant has not exhausted all available avenues of administrative relief prior to seeking correction of his military records. (Though as a matter of practicality-considering the amount of time that has passed since this request was submitted - AFPC/DPSIM advises this latter statement not be a sole reason for denial; if sufficient evidence can be obtained the record should be corrected per this BCMR.) Please note, if the board recommends approval - the Special Programs Branch is unable to remove any scores prior to 1 July 2010 as only records on this date and after were merged into the new system. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The advisory states that he has not exhausted all available avenues of administrative relief. It was then pointed out that he has two years to appeal the error to the Wing CC. The advisory further states that since this error was not reported until 21 October 2013 he is within the two year window for Wing CC appeal. He would like the record to show that he approached the 50th SW Fitness Monitor with this error and it was determined that since the error occurred (and was initially identified) over two years ago (27 June 2006) that he would have to submit a DD Form 149. He believes that he is caught in the middle over interpretation of AFI 36-2905. If the change cannot be approved - he request guidance be given to his chain of command that the authority to oversee this appeal is within their jurisdiction. The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit E. 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. The applicant’s contentions are duly noted; 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 that the applicant has not exhausted his administrative avenues for relief. We advise the applicant to appeal his FA via Wing appeal and subsequently through the FAAB as outlined by the OPR. However, should after exhausting his administrative avenue of relief, the applicant feel he is still a victim of an error or injustice, the applicant may resubmit his application to the Board for consideration. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of an 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-2014-00591 in Executive Session on 28 May 2015, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 7 January 2014, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Available Master Personnel Record. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 10 March 2015. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 April 2015. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, not dated. 4