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 applicants 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 applicants 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 applicants 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
applicants 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 applicants 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
applicants 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. Applicants 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
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01599
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01599 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Fitness Assessment (FA) dated 2 Jul 13 be removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02107
However, she tested three days later on 16 May 2014 and received a measurement of 30.5 which led to a satisfactory score. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 November 2014.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02012
In support of his appeal, the applicant submits a Medical Determination Letter, signed by his medical provider, which stated that, he had a documented medical condition that precluded him from achieving a passing score in a non-exempt portion of the FA test. The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2905, Fitness Program, dated 21 Oct 2013, states that any military member can appeal his or her own FA through a Wing-Level...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02030
In accordance with AFI 36-2905, Fitness Program, when an Airman receives four Unsatisfactory FA scores within a 24-month period and a medical records review by a military health care provider has ruled out medical conditions precluding the Airman from achieving a passing score, the Unit Commander must make a discharge or retention recommendation to the separation authority. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01128
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial. In this respect, we note this Board is the highest administrative level of appeal within the Air Force.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03880
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03880 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Fitness Assessment (FA) dated 26 Jul 13 be corrected to reflect Satisfactory in the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00709
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial of the applicants request for the removal of the contested FA due to the applicant not exhausting all administrative remedies. In this respect, this Board is the highest administrative level of appeal within the Air Force. Exhibit B. DD Form 149, dated 24 Mar 14, w/atchs.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05761
In Accordance With (IAW) AFI 36-2905, Fitness Program, dated 21 Oct 13, any military member can appeal their FA through a wing-level appeals board and then through the AFPC Fitness Assessment Appeals Board (FAAB) within two years of discovering the error/injustice. The applicant did not file an appeal through the Evaluation Report Appeals Board (ERAB) under the provisions of AFI 36-2406, Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Systems. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Oct 14.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00031
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00031 XXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Fitness Assessment (FA), dated 8 Jan 10 be declared void and removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS). In view of this and since this avenue of administrative relief was available at the time the applicant submitted...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00472
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He had a medical condition at the time he took the FA in question which was not documented on an AF Form 422 and prevented him from achieving a passing score. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial based upon the fact that the applicant has not exhausted all available...