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. 3 4 5 6