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.