RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  00-01382
            INDEX CODE:  107.00

            COUNSEL:  None

            HEARING DESIRED:  No


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) for the  period  2 Mar  96 –
10 Mar 99 be considered in the promotion process for cycle 99E5.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The inclusive dates for the decoration are 2 Mar 96  to  10 Mar  99.
The original DÉCOR-6, Recommendation for Decoration Printout  (RDP),
was ordered on 15 May 99, before the promotion cutoff date of 31 May
99.  Therefore, the points for the decoration should have counted on
the 99E5 testing cycle.   The  absence  of  these  points  cost  him
promotion to E-5 (staff sergeant).  The original decoration was lost
at a time when his  squadron  changed  commanders.   When  this  was
discovered and the injustice proven legitimate to his new commander,
the commander resubmitted the decoration  and  his  group  commander
signed it and backdated it to the original order date.  He is  being
punished for something he had no control over.

Applicant’s complete 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 offices of the Air Force.   Accordingly,
there  is  no  need  to  recite  these  facts  in  this  Record   of
Proceedings.

_________________________________________________________________


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Chief, Awards & Decorations Section, AFPC/DPPPR,  reviewed  this
application and indicated that the  decoration  was  awarded  within
three years of the act, achievement, or service.  This  is  in  line
with the guidance found in AFI 36-2803, The  Air  Force  Awards  and
Decorations Program, dated 1 Jan 98.  The RDP was dated  19 Jan  99.
The decoration was awarded well within the time limits.

A  complete  copy  of  the  Air  Force  evaluation  is  attached  at
Exhibit C.

The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, AFPC/DPPPWB, also reviewed this
application and indicated that the applicant’s total promotion score
for the 99E5 cycle is 275.76 and the score required for selection in
his Control Air Force Specialty Code (CAFSC) was 276.70.  He  missed
promotion selection by .94 of a point.  An AFCM is worth 3  weighted
promotion points.  This decoration would make applicant  a  selectee
to staff sergeant  during  cycle  99E5,  pending  a  favorable  data
verification and the recommendation of his commander.

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 closeout date of the decoration must be  on  or
before the promotion eligibility cutoff date (PECD), and the date of
the DÉCOR-6, RDP, must be before the  date  of  selections  for  the
cycle in question.  Each promotion cycle  has  an  established  PECD
which is used to determine in which AFSC or Chief  Enlisted  Manager
(CEM)  code  the  member  will  be  considered,  as  well  as  which
performance reports and decorations will be used  in  the  promotion
consideration.  The PECD for the promotion  cycle  in  question  was
31 Mar 99.  In addition, a decoration that a member claims was lost,
downgraded, etc., must be verified and fully documented that it  was
placed into official channels prior to  the  selection  date.   This
also  includes  decorations  that  were  disapproved  initially  but
subsequently resubmitted and approved.

DPPPWB states that this decoration does not meet  the  criteria  for
promotion credit during the 99E5 cycle because there is no  tangible
evidence  the  resubmitted  decoration  was  placed  into   official
channels prior to the date selections for the 99E5 cycle were  made.
In accordance with AFI  36-2803,  paragraph  3-1,  a  decoration  is
considered to  have  been  placed  in  official  channels  when  the
decoration recommendation is signed by the initiating  official  and
indorsed by a higher official in the chain of command.

DPPPWB further states that documentation included in the applicant’s
case file reflects the decoration  recommendation  package  was  not
officially placed into military channels until after selections  for
the 99E5 cycle were accomplished.  The orders are dated  27 Jan  00,
with an RDP date of 19 Jan 00, which was after  promotions  for  the
99E5 cycle were completed (6 Aug  99)  and  announced  (18 Aug  99).
There is  no  tangible  evidence  the  decoration  was  placed  into
official channels before selections for the 99E5 cycle were made and
to approve the applicant’s request would not be fair or equitable to
many  others  in  the  same  situation  who  also  missed  promotion
selection by a narrow margin.  The applicant’s request to  have  the
decoration included in the promotion process for the 99E5  cycle  as
an exception to policy was disapproved by the  Promotion  Management
Section at the Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC) and DPPPWB  concurs
with their decision.

A complete copy of their evaluation, with attachment, is attached at
Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to  applicant  on
23 Jun 00 for review and response.  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.     Insufficient  relevant  evidence  has   been   presented   to
demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.   After  a
thorough review of  the  applicant’s  complete  submission  and  the
procedures  for  submitting  an  individual  for  an  award   of   a
decoration, we find  the  applicant’s  award  package  was  properly
processed.  We note that, in order for a decoration to  be  credited
for a specific promotion cycle, the closeout date of the  decoration
must be on or before the PECD, and the date of the DÉCOR-6  must  be
before the date of selections for a  particular  cycle.   While  the
closeout date of the AFCM is before the PECD for cycle 99E5, the RDP
date is 19 Jan 00, after the selections were made  (6 Aug  99).   No
evidence has been presented to show that the AFCM  was  placed  into
official channels, i.e.,  signed  by  the  initiating  official  and
indorsed by a higher  official  in  the  chain  of  command,  before
selections were made for cycle 99E5.  Therefore, in accordance  with
the current governing policy, the AFCM does not  meet  the  criteria
for promotion credit during cycle 99E5.  In view of  the  foregoing,
we did not find that the applicant has been the victim of  an  error
or injustice and find no compelling basis to recommend granting  the
relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of probable material error  or  injustice;
that the application was denied without a personal  appearance;  and
that 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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 9 November 2000, under the  provisions  of  Air
Force Instruction 36-2603:

                  Mr. Wayne R. Gracie, Panel Chair
                  Ms. Marcia J. Bachman, Member
                  Mr. Clarence D. Long, III, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 16 May 00, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 26 May 00.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 2 Jun 00, w/atch.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 23 Jun 00.




                                   WAYNE R. GRACIE
                                   Panel Chair