RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  98-03517
                 INDEX CODE:  107

                 COUNSEL:  NONE

                 HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  The Special Order G-1180, dated 21 August 1998, awarding  the  Air
Force Commendation Medal First Oak Leaf Cluster (AFCM 1OLC),  for  the
period 30 September 1995 to 21 November 1997,  with  a  Recommendation
for Decoration Printout (RDP) date of 5 June 1998, be rescinded and  a
new order published with an earlier RDP date.

2.  The AFCM 1OLC, with a earlier  RDP  date,  be  considered  in  the
promotion process for cycle 98E6 to the grade of technical sergeant (E-
6).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Both his Squadron Commander and First Sergeant believe  an  individual
was derelict in the performance of his official duty.  On two separate
occasions, December 1997 and March 1998,  this  individual  failed  to
provide a Recommendation  for  Decoration  Printout  (RDP-DECOR-6)  as
requested by the applicant’s  previous  organization  at  Edwards  Air
Force Base, California.  As a result, the AFCM 1OLC was not  submitted
in time for promotion consideration resulting in his nonselection  for
promotion to the grade of technical sergeant.

In support of his  request,  applicant  submits  statements  from  his
Squadron Command and First Sergeant  supporting  applicant’s  request.
He also submits a copy of his Weighted Airman Promotion  Score  (WAPS)
notice and copies of Enlisted Performance Reports (EPRs).

Applicant’s submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from  the
applicant's military records, are contained in the letters prepared by
the appropriate Air Force  office  of  primary  responsibility  (OPR).
Accordingly, there is no need to recite these facts in this Record  of
Proceedings.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Chief,  Recognition  Programs  Branch,  Promotion,  Evaluation,  &
Recognition  Division,  HQ  AFPC/DPPPRA,   states   that   Air   Force
Instruction (AFI)  36-2803,  The  Air  Force  Awards  and  Decorations
Program, requires recommendations be submitted as  soon  as  possible,
into official channels within two  years,  and  awarded  within  three
years of the act,  achievement  or  service  performed.   The  DECOR-6
provided shows the recommendation was not in official  channels  until
26 June 1998, well within the specified time period.   They  recommend
the applicant’s request be denied.

A copy of the Air Force evaluation, with attachment,  is  attached  at
Exhibit B.

The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section,  Enlisted  Promotion  &  Military
Testing Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, states  that  policies  regarding  the
approval of a decoration and the credit of a decoration for  promotion
purposes are two separate and distinct policies.   Current  Air  Force
promotion policy dictates that before a decoration is credited  for  a
specific promotion cycle, the close-out date of the decoration must be
on or before the promotion eligibility cutoff  date  (PECD),  and  the
date of the DECOR-6 RDP must be before the date of selections for  the
cycle in question.  The PECD for the promotion cycle in  question  was
31 December 1997.  In addition, a  decoration  must  be  verified  and
fully documented that it was placed into official  channels  prior  to
the selection date.

This decoration does not meet the criteria for promotion credit during
the 98E6 cycle because there is no tangible  evidence  the  decoration
was placed into official channels prior to the date selections for the
98E6 cycle were made.  Selections for this cycle were made on  20  May
1998 and the RDP is date 5 June  1998.   To  approve  the  applicant’s
request would not be fair or equitable to  many  others  in  the  same
situation who also miss promotion selection by a narrow margin and are
not permitted to have an “after the  fact”  decoration  count  in  the
promotion process.  They recommend the request be denied.

A copy of the Air Force evaluation, with attachment,  is  attached  at
Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on
25 January 1999 for  review  and  response.   Applicant  submitted  an
additional statement from his Squadron Commander  in  support  of  his
request.   Applicant’s  response,  with  attachment,  is  attached  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.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of probable error or injustice to warrant  a  correction  to
the applicant's record with regard to  the  award  of  the  Air  Force
Commendation  Medal  First  Oak   Leaf   Cluster   (AFCM   1OLC)   and
consideration for promotion to the grade  of  technical  sergeant  for
cycle 98E6.  We note that the AFCM 1OLC, for the period  30  September
1995 to 21 November 1997, had a Recommendation for Decoration Printout
(RDP) date of 5 June 1998 and was approved by  Special  Order  G-1180,
dated 21 August 1998, for the end of applicant's assignment at Edwards
Air Force Base (AFB), California.   The  applicant  made  a  permanent
change of station (PCS) move in November 1997 to McConnell AFB Kansas,
which was a short notice assignment due to  humanitarian  reasons  and
his records were forwarded to his new assignment.   A  statement  from
the applicant’s former Squadron Commander indicates  that  because  of
the short notice PCS, the former Unit did not have sufficient time  to
process the applicant’s award and  was  forced  to  rely  on  the  new
assignment orderly room  to  initiate  the  decoration  process.   The
Commander states that through gross neglect, the required DECOR 6  was
not requested until after  the  promotion  eligibility  cut  off  date
(PECD) of 31 December 1997.  We believe that an unreasonable amount of
time elapsed until the applicant received the award which  caused  him
to miss promotion  to  the  grade  of  technical  sergeant.   Had  the
applicant’s orderly room been responsive within a reasonable period of
time, and the award placed in official channels, applicant's score for
selection in his Controlled Air Force  Specialty  Code  (CAFSC)  would
have made him a selectee for  promotion  to  the  grade  of  technical
sergeant.  Therefore, we  recommend  that,  in  all  fairness  to  the
applicant, the AFCM 1OLC be awarded with  an  earlier  RDP  date  that
would have allowed the AFCM 1OLC to be included and considered in  the
98E6 promotion cycle.  It is further recommended that he  be  provided
supplemental consideration for promotion to  the  grade  of  technical
sergeant (E-6), to include the AFCM 1OLC, for all  appropriate  cycles
beginning with cycle 98E6.

_______________________________________________________________________
_____________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the  Department  of  the  Air  Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show  that  the  Recommendation
for Decoration Printout (RDP) (DECOR-6), for  the  award  of  the  Air
Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) covering the period 30 September  1995
to 21 November 1997, be changed to 5 May  1998,  rather  than  5  June
1998.

It  is  further  recommended  that   he   be   provided   supplemental
consideration for promotion to the grade of technical  sergeant  (E-6)
for all appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 98E6.

If  AFPC  discovers  any  adverse  factors  during  or  subsequent  to
supplemental consideration that are separate and apart, and  unrelated
to the issues involved in this application that  would  have  rendered
the applicant ineligible for the promotion, such information  will  be
documented and presented to the Board for a final determination on the
individual’s qualification for the promotion.

If supplemental promotion consideration results in the  selection  for
promotion to the higher grade, immediately after  such  promotion  the
records shall be corrected to show that applicant was promoted to  the
higher grade on the date  of  rank  established  by  the  supplemental
promotion and that applicant is entitled to all pay,  allowances,  and
benefits of such grade as of that date.

_______________________________________________________________________
_____________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 15 July 1999, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                  Mrs. Barbara A. Westgate, Panel Chair
                  Mr. Mike Novel, Member
              Ms. Ann L. Heidig, Member

All members  voted  to  correct  the  records,  as  recommended.   The
following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Dec 98, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPRA, dated 31 Dec 98, w/atch.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 6 Jan 99.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 25 Jan 99.
   Exhibit E.  Applicant’s Letter, dated 10 Feb 99, w/atch.




                                   BARBARA A. WESTGATE
                                   Panel Chair


INDEX CODE:  107

AFBCMR 98-03517




MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

      Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air
Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority
of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is
directed that:

      The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
Force relating to , , be corrected to show that the Recommendation for
Decoration Printout (RDP) (DECOR-6), for the award of the Air Force
Commendation Medal (AFCM) covering the period 30 September 1995 to 21
November 1997, be changed to 5 May 1998, rather than 5 June 1998.

      It is further directed that he be provided supplemental
consideration for promotion to the grade of technical sergeant (E-6)
for all appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 98E6.

      If AFPC discovers any adverse factors during or subsequent to
supplemental consideration that are separate and apart, and unrelated
to the issues involved in this application that would have rendered
the applicant ineligible for the promotion, such information will be
documented and presented to the Board for a final determination on the
individual’s qualification for the promotion.

      If supplemental promotion consideration results in the selection
for promotion to the higher grade, immediately after such promotion
the records shall be corrected to show that applicant was promoted to
the higher grade on the date of rank established by the supplemental
promotion and that applicant is entitled to all pay, allowances, and
benefits of such grade as of that date.







   JOE G. LINEBERGER

   Director

   Air Force Review Boards Agency