RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02274 XXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Fitness Assessment (FA), dated 26 Apr 13 be declared void and removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS). ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The applicant states that due to faulty electronic equipment he received an unsatisfactory on the cardio component of the FA. In support of his appeal, the applicant submits; a personal letter to the board along with a witness statement from another FA participant indicating that they both tried two different heart monitors and both of them had abnormally high readings. The applicant believes that the equipment provided, from the FAC, was faulty and was the cause of his FA failure. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 26 Apr 13, the applicant participated in the contested FA and attained a composite score of 74.13 unsatisfactory. The applicant’s last five FA results are as follows: Date Composite Score Rating 26 Jul 13 86.50 Satisfactory *26 Apr 13 74.13 Unsatisfactory 19 Sep 12 79.50 Satisfactory 26 Jun 12 60.70 Unsatisfactory 26 May 08 72.00 Marginal * Contested FA On 16 Dec 13 a similar request was considered and denied by the Fitness Assessments Appeals Board (FAAB) due to “Insufficient evidence; specifically witness statement to support injustice.” IAW AFI 36-2905, Fitness Program (AFGM5) dated 3 Jan 13, paragraph 1.15.1 0.2., "Trains FAC staff (where a FAC exists) to conduct official FAs, including proper equipment procurement, maintenance and use." In addition, paragraph 1.20.1.8 also states that the FAC will ensure that FA equipment is procured, maintained, and replaced as needed. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial of the applicant’s request and states, in part, that although the applicant contends the equipment provided by the FAC during the contested FA was faulty, he has not provided a memorandum from the FAC, indicating the faulty equipment caused the applicant to fail the FA. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation, with attachments, was forwarded to the applicant on 10 Jan 14 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit C). ________________________________________________________________ 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. 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 and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. While the applicant has a witness statement from another FA participant, he has not met his burden of proving the contested FA should be disturbed. In this respect, we note the applicant contends the FAC heart rate monitor equipment was not been working properly; however, there is no indication that he addressed the issue with the FAC or his chain-of-command. More specifically, the applicant failed to provide a memorandum, from the FAC supporting the likelihood of his claim. Should the applicant provide such evidence, we would be willing to reconsider his request. However, in view of the above and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. ________________________________________________________________ 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-2013-02274 in Executive Session on 27 Mar 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Ms. XXXXXXXXX, Chair Ms. XXXXXXXXX, Vice Chair Ms. XXXXXXXXX, Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-02274 was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 2 May 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 29 Oct 13, w/atchs. Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Jan 14. XXXXXXXXX Chair 1