RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03388

					COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Fitness Assessment (FA) dated 4 Jun 13 be removed from the Air Force Fitness Management System (AFFMS).

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The Fitness Assessment Cell (FAC) failed to locate the “right iliac crest” in accordance with the governing instructions resulting in an AC measurement of 39.5". After completing his FA, he requested his Unit Fitness Program Manager (UFPM) -re-accomplish an AC measurement.  Within 4-hours of the FAC measurement, his UFPM measured his AC at 38.75” that was .75” smaller than the FAC measurement and was within in passing parameters.  Assuming both individuals measured his AC IAW the AFI, there is no possible way for a .75” variance within a 4-hour window.  Note, the UFPM measurement did not round down to the nearest ½ inch as stated in the AFI that would have resulted in a 1-inch variance.  Considering the possibility one individual measured incorrectly, the variance in measurements itself puts into question the accuracy of the AC measurement and a retest/re-measurement should have been allowed.  

The 786 FSS/CC non-concurred with his request to remove the FA score under administrative grounds stating, “the re-measurement is invalid because the member who did it is not a member of the FAC and was not performing the re-measurement in the capacity of a FAC augmentee.”  During a phone conversation, the 786 FSS/FSO reiterated the above decision and explained if a question of test validity ever arises, they “will always err on the side of the FAC.”  The applicant asked if he had requested a re-measurement on the spot, could that have been accomplished.  The FSO’s responded by stating, “it is up to the FAC representative ...they do not have to comply with that request, they have final say in the results.”  In fact, 36-2905 item 31 states, “Airmen only have one opportunity to complete each of the FA components per FA.”

The 786 FSS responses are of considerable concern to him.  First, there is no immediate process to raise concerns of potential errors during the testing process.  Lacking other options, he went to his unit Commander and UFPM for assistance.  UFPMs are trained to administer the entire FA and could confirm either his concerns or the FACs results.  These trained personnel, regardless if they are on duty supporting the FAC or not, should be included in a checks-and-balance process that currently does not exist. . Second, the 786 FSS leadership policy to “always err on the side of the FAC;” this policy is essentially stating the FAC's airman and civilians are infallible.  Decisions or errors that have potential career ending impacts should not be left unquestioned without any manner of checks-and-balances.

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 lieutenant colonel.

The applicant’s last five FA scores are as follows:

	DATE	RESULT

	 3 Oct 13	SATISFACTORY
*	 4 Jun 13	UNSATISFACTORY
	23 Oct 12	SATISFACTORY
	14 Feb 12	SATISFACTORY
	16 Nov 11	SATISFACTORY

* Contested FA test.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, which is attached at Exhibit B.    

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial.  After a thorough review of the documentation provided by the applicant, there is insufficient evidence to support the applicant’s claim.  IAW AFI 36-2905_AFGM5, dated 03 Jan 13, para 7d “The tester will measure the circumference three times and record each measurement rounding down to the nearest ½ inch.  If any of the measures differ by more than one inch from the other two, the tester will take an additional measurement.  The tester will add the three closest measurements, divide by three, and round down to the nearest ½ inch. The tester will record this value as the AC measurement.”  The applicant did not provide his fitness score sheet nor did he provide documentation from the FAC acknowledging the error and an invalidation memorandum from the Unit Commander indicating his/her decision to invalidate the FA.

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

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 20 Jun 14 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice warranting partial relief.   While we note the applicant's stated request to have the entire FA removed, we believe the appropriate measure of relief is to "exempt" the abdominal circumference (AC) component for the FA dated 4 Jun 13.  The Board notes the Air Force office of primary responsibility recommendation to deny, however, we believe the applicant has raised reasonable doubt regarding the accuracy of the contested fitness assessment.  In this respect, we note the abdominal circumference (AC) score of the contested assessment represents a significant regression when compared to the score received four hours later.  Specifically, his AC was measured .75 of an inch less four hours later than the first measurement.  While we note the applicant did not provide the documentation from the FAC acknowledging the error, we do note the Unit Commander's concurrence that an error appeared to have occurred and that he concurred with accepting the second measurement.  We also find that the applicant's Unit Fitness Program Manager (UFPM) acted in the capacity of an augmentee for the Fitness Assessment Cell.  Consequently, the applicant’s overall composite score will be reflected as 91.38, resulting in an excellent fitness level.  Therefore, in order to preclude the possibility of an injustice to the applicant, we recommend his record be corrected as indicated below.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that the abdominal circumference (AC) component of the Fitness Assessment, dated 3 June 2013, reflect “exempt” in the Air Force Fitness Management System.  

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-03388 in Executive Session on 16 Oct 2014 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

All members voted to correct the records as recommended.  The following documentary evidence for Docket Number AFBCMR BC-2013-03388 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 Jul 13, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 27 May 13, 
	            w/atchs.	
	Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Jun 13.

						

1 2