ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-01071
INDEX CODE: 107.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
RESUME OF CASE:
On 9 November 2000, the Board considered and denied applicant’s request
that she be awarded the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) for the period
24 April 1978 to 28 March 1982. A complete copy of the Record of
Proceedings is attached at Exhibit F.
In a letter, dated 20 April 2001, the applicant provided statements from
her former rating chain and requests reconsideration of her appeal. The
applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit G.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of probable error or injustice. After thoroughly reviewing the
evidence of record and the additional documentation provided by the
applicant, the majority of the Board finds sufficient evidence to award her
the AFCM. Based on the additional documentation submitted by the
applicant, which includes a statement from the former Tactical Air Command
Commander, a majority of the Board believes the award in question was not
processed due to an administrative error. Applicant, in her initial
application provided a statement from her supervisor indicating that he
disregarded processing because he was involved in learning his new job.
The above reference statement from the TAC commander reveals that he would
have approved the award had it been submitted. In view of the totality of
the evidence of record, the majority of the Board believes that the
applicant has established that she has been the victim of an injustice.
Therefore, a majority of the Board recommends the applicant’s records be
corrected to the extent indicated below.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating
to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that she was awarded the Air Force
Commendation Medal for the period 24 April 1978 to 28 March 1982.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive
Session on 21 June 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Wayne R. Gracie, Panel Chair
Mr. Clarence D. Long, III, Member
Ms. Marcia J. Bachman, Member
A majority of the Board voted to correct the records, as recommended. Mr.
Long voted to deny the application but does not wish to submit a Minority
Report. The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit F. Record of Proceedings, dated 28 Nov 00, w/atchs.
Exhibit G. Letter, Applicant, dated 20 Apr 01, w/atchs.
WAYNE R. GRACIE
Panel Chair
AFBCMR 00-01071
INDEX CODE: 107.00
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 she was awarded the Air Force
Commendation Medal for the period 24 April 1978 to 28 March 1982.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
She has not provided any documentation showing that a recommendation was submitted into official channels within two years of her meritorious service for that period. They state the RDP was not requested until 18 years after the closeout date of the decoration period, and was signed by retired personnel in her then chain of command. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...
In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a copy of the board discrepancy report, dated 17 Nov 99 (Exhibit A). Even though the citations were not on file for the board, they were in evidence before the board in that they were reflected on the OSB. Since the board members were aware of the decorations, they were factored into the promotion evaluation.
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. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01574
___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR reviewed this application and recommended denial. HQ AFPC/DPPPR’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 13 Jul 07 for review and comment within 30 days. Therefore, we recommend the applicant’s record be...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02306
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005- 02306 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 25 JANUARY 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Distinguished Service Medal (DSM) and the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM). To be awarded the AFCM, a member must have distinguished himself by meritorious...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02250
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02250 INDEX CODE: 131.01 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 22 JAN 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be considered for promotion to the grade of major by special selection board (SSB) for the CY04A Major Central Selection Board (1 Nov 04) (P0404A) with his Air Force...
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states that he is very disappointed in the way AFPC analyzed and commented on the facts. Applicant's complete response is attached at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00456
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends the applicant’s request for award of the PH be denied. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and the recommendation of the Air Force and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or an injustice. The applicant stated he received...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00420
On 9 Apr 03, the applicant was awarded the contested AFCM 1OLC for the period 14 Feb 98 to 3 Jan 02, rather than 1 Dec 01, for meritorious service while assigned to the 86th Medical Squadron at Landstuhl, Germany. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR indicates since an IPCOT is not a condition for which an individual may be recommended for a decoration, it appears the recommending official submitted the applicant for an...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02232
___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that after a complete review of the applicant’s military record and provided documentation, they were unable to find evidence of a recommendation to validate the applicant’s entitlement to the AFCM. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S...