RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-03575

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES 


________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her 26 Oct 11 Fitness Assessment (FA) failure be declared void 
and removed from her records.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was unfairly assessed during the sit-up component of the 
contested FA.  She was in the process of completing the sit-up 
component when her testing counter asked her to adjust her knee 
angle.  Subsequent to making the adjustment and resuming the 
test, her testing counter requested that she stop completing 
sit-ups (the testing counter had been directed to stop counting 
at 19); however she continued.  Once all components were 
completed, she contacted her commander and the commander 
submitted a memorandum on the applicant’s behalf to retest.  She 
retested just two days later, successfully completing all 
components, and attaining an overall excellent rating.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant served in the Regular Air Force in the grade of 
major (O-4) during the matter under review.

On 26 Oct 11, the applicant participated in the contested FA and 
failed to attain the minimum score in the sit-up component.  The 
record also indicates the applicant did not complete the cardio 
component of the FA.  As a result, she was credited with 3.50 
points for the sit-up component and 0.00 points for the cardio 
component, resulting in an overall composite score of 30.30, 
which constitutes an unsatisfactory rating.  

On 31 Mar 14, the Fitness Assessment Appeals Board (FAAB) 
directed the applicant’s records be corrected to reflect she was 
exempt from the sit-up component of the contested FA.  However, 
because the applicant did not attain the minimum points required 
in the cardio component of the FA, this correction had no impact 
on her overall rating of unsatisfactory.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or an injustice.  Although the applicant’s commander 
submitted a request to invalidate the contested FA, indicating 
that he approved her request to re-take the FA with another 
evaluator, there is no documentation from the Fitness Assessment 
Cell (FAC) stating the 26 Oct 11 FA was done in error nor was 
there medical invalidation documentation.  In accordance with 
AFI 36-2905 AFGM 6, paragraph 26, if the applicant believes 
his/her score was in error or was unjust, they may submit a 
request to the AFBCMR for correction.  

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit B.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant’s details her account of the facts related to the 
contested FA; she highlights the fact that the fitness AFI in 
effect at the time (dated 20 Dec 10) did not stipulate how to 
address issues when military members disagree with FA 
assessments.  The applicant states that she notified the FAC 
personnel of the issue with the sit-ups but they would not allow 
her to retest on that component, thereby failing the assessment 
regardless of whether or not she completed the cardio component.  
Based on this information, she obtained a letter from her 
commander, which authorized her to retested two days later, when 
she obtained a score of 90.3 percent (an overall excellent 
rating).  The 26 Oct 11 FA is not a true reflection of her 
fitness level; she takes FAs seriously, striving to be an 
example for others to emulate.  In support of her response, she 
provides an expanded personal statement and a copy of her Air 
Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS) record.  The applicant’s 
complete response, with attachments, is at 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 error or injustice warranting 
corrective action.  After a thorough review of the evidence of 
record and the applicant’s complete submission, we are not 
convinced that additional relief beyond that rendered 
administratively is warranted.  In this respect, we note the Air 
Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) has corrected the 
applicant’s records administratively to reflect that she was 
exempt from the sit-up component of the contested fitness 
assessment (FA).  While the applicant argues that further relief 
is warranted, we believe the administrative correction noted 
above constitutes full and fitting relief.  In this respect, we 
note the applicant’s predicament is of her own making; had she 
not departed the testing area without authority before the 
cardio component could be administered, the administrative 
correction noted above would have resulted in an overall passing 
score.  Even if we accept for the sake of argument the 
applicant’s assertion that Air Force policy on contesting FA 
outcomes was somehow ambiguous, we are not convinced that it was 
reasonable for an officer of the applicant’s rank and tenure to 
absent herself from the situation prior to completing the FA in 
its entirety, regardless of whether or not she believed the sit-
up component of the contested FA was unfairly administered.  
Therefore, we are not convinced that her decision to not 
participate in the cardio component renders her the victim of an 
injustice that would cause us to recommend that additional 
relief be granted.

________________________________________________________________

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-2013-03575 in Executive Session on 24 Sep 13, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Ms., Panel Chair
	Ms., Member
	Mr., Member

?
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2013-03575 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 11 Feb 13, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 31 Mar 14.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Apr 14.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 20 May 14.