RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBERS:  BC-2003-00838
            INDEX CODE:  131.00
            COUNSEL:  None

            HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her date of rank (DOR) to staff sergeant (SSgt) be corrected  and  her
Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM) for the period 31 May 1995  through
31 May 1999 be considered in supplemental promotion consideration  for
the cycle 00E5.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

In March 2000, as she was preparing to compete for promotion to  staff
sergeant, MSgt W. reviewed her military personnel  records  and  asked
her if she had been submitted for an end-of-tour decoration at  Offutt
AFB.  She told MSgt W. that an Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM)  was
submitted for her work at Offutt.  MSgt W. checked the status  of  the
decoration and informed her that the AFAM was not in her records.   He
called HQ AFOSI and Offutt AFB to track it down.  MSgt W. learned  the
55th Support Group military personnel flight had no record of approval
or disapproval of a decoration for  the  applicant.   Apparently,  the
entire recommendation for decoration was lost in processing.  MSgt  W.
recognized the need to get the process for  the  decoration  restarted
before the eligibility cutoff date of 31 March 2000.  On 7 March 2000,
MSgt W. notified TSgt N., Chief of Personnel for AFOSI  Region  3,  of
the  situation  regarding  her  decoration.   MSgt   W.   obtained   a
replacement Recommendation for Decoration  Printout  (RDP)  (DÉCOR  6)
from TSgt N. and faxed it  to  MSgt  W.  (SIC),  who  resubmitted  the
applicant’s nomination for the AFAM.  MSgt W. then informed the Region
3’s leaders of the applicant’s situation.

She tested for promotion in cycle  00E5  and  when  the  results  were
released she found out she was less  than  one  point  away  from  the
cutoff score.  She was hopeful that with the one point  awarded  under
the Weighted Airman Promotion System (WAPS) for an AFAM that she would
be promoted  under  that  cycle  with  supplemental  consideration  as
provided for in AFI 36-2502.

Her new supervisor, MSgt P. checked on the status of  the  resubmitted
AFAM and learned the nomination had been lost again.
MSgt P. submitted a second resubmission for the  decoration  with  the
assistance of the 55th Services Squadron.  The decoration was approved
and she requested supplemental consideration by the Air Force Enlisted
Promotions Branch (AFPC/DPPW) on 30 July 2001.  The request included a
copy of the now-approved decoration and the  DÉCOR  6,with  a  printed
date of 7 March 2000.  On 8  February  2002,  via  e-mail,  AFPC/DPPPW
stated that without the benefit of the original  DÉCOR  6  showing  an
endorsement dated before the PECD, they would not be able to grant her
request to have the AFAM included in the computing of  her  00E5  WAPS
score.

Applicant's complete submission,  with  attachments,  is  attached  at
Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 31 May 1995, in the
grade of airman basic for a period of four years.

Promotion selections for the cycle 00E5 were made  on  10  July  2000,
with public release on 19 July 2000.   The  total  weighted  promotion
score required for selection in the applicant’s  Air  Force  Specialty
Code (AFSC) was 262.77.   The  applicant’s  total  weighted  promotion
score was 262.40.

Special Orders GB-00216, dated 18 July 2001, awarded the applicant the
AFAM for the period 31 May 1995 to 16 March 2000.  The Special  Orders
indicated the Recommendation for Decoration Printout (RDP) was dated 9
March 2001.  The AFAM is worth one (1) point in the computation  of  a
member’s total promotion score.

For a decoration to be  eligible  for  consideration  in  a  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 RDP must
be before the date of selections for the cycle in question.

Since the RDP  was  prepared  after  selections  for  the  cycle  were
announced, the decoration was not considered in the promotion  process
for cycle 00E5.

The applicant was  selected  for  promotion  to  the  grade  of  staff
sergeant during cycle 01E5, with a date of rank of 1 October 2001.

The applicant was released from  active  duty  on  30  July  2002,  in
accordance with AFI 36-3208, Completion of  Required  Active  Service.
She served seven years and two months of active duty.

On 25 February 2003, Special Orders GB-00216 were amended  to  reflect
inclusive dates for the AFAM as 31 May 1995 to 31 May 1999.

Applicant’s EPR profile is listed below.

                 PERIOD ENDING          OVERALL EVALUATION

            30 Jan 97                   5
            30 Jan 98                   5
            30 Jan 99                   5
            20 Oct 99                   5
            29 Jun 00                   5
             4 May 01                   5
             4 May 02                   5

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPPRP states that decorations will be submitted into official
channels (signed by the recommending official and endorsed by the next
higher official in the chain of command) within two years, and awarded
within three years, of  the  act,  accomplishment   or  service.   The
original  closeout  date  was 16 March 2000, but was changed to 31 May
1999 on 25 February 2003, and the original  request  for  the RDP  was
 reflected as 9 March 2001, but was changed to 9 March 2000 on 26 July
2001.  The RDP date was based on a DÉCOR 6 which was  invalid  because
it was not signed by the supervisor, and the  squadron  commander  who
did sign it did not date it.  Therefore, this was not the third  DÉCOR
6, submitted with the recommendation package that was  approved.   The
applicant believes a third DÉCOR 6 had to have been ordered, since the
second package (with the 9 March 2000 DÉCOR 6) was  lost.   Therefore,
the applicant’s  decoration  was  processed  and  awarded  within  the
specified time limits.

Based on the  documentation  the  applicant  provided,  it  cannot  be
verified when the third recommendation  package  was  submitted.   The
second package was  submitted  after  9  March  2000,  but  was  lost,
however, the DÉCOR 6  the  applicant  provided  was  from  the  second
submission, not the  third.   Furthermore,  when  the  decoration  was
amended the applicant did not ensure that a copy of the amendment  was
placed in  her  records.   The  second  amendment  which  changed  the
inclusive dates of the decoration was published more than  six  months
after the applicant separated from active duty.  Therefore, since  the
decoration was processed with the  required  two  years  of  the  act,
service  or  accomplishment,  DPPPR  has  no  action   regarding   the
applicant’s case.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPPWB states 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).   The  date
of the DÉCOR-6 Recommendation for Decoration Printout (RDP),  must  be
before the date of selections for the cycle in question.  The PECD  is
established for each promotion cycle  to  determine  which  Air  Force
Specialty Code (AFSC),  as  well  as  which  performance  reports  and
decorations are to be used in the promotion consideration process.   A
decoration must be verified and documented that  it  was  placed  into
official channels prior to the selection date.

The applicant’s decoration does not meet the  criteria  for  promotion
during cycle 00E5 because the DÉCOR 6 was not signed or dated  by  the
applicant’s  supervisor.   This  policy  was  initiated  to   preclude
personnel from submitting someone after  promotion  selections  for  a
decoration with a retroactive decoration effective date, to  put  them
over the selection cutoff score.  Exceptions to this policy  are  only
considered when the airman can  support  a  previous  submission  with
documentation or statements including  conclusive  evidence  that  the
recommendation was officially placed into military channels within the
prescribed time limit and conclusive evidence the  recommendation  was
not acted upon through loss or inadvertence.  The Air Force Awards and
Decorations program in accordance with AFI 36-2803 states a decoration
is considered to have been placed into the official channels when  the
decoration recommendation is signed by  the  initiating  official  and
indorsed by a higher official in the chain of command.

After an extensive review of the circumstances of  this  case,  DPPPWB
states there is no conclusive evidence that the applicant’s decoration
was placed into official channels prior to the  date  promotions  were
announced for cycle 00E5 and her becoming aware that  she  had  missed
promotion by less than one point.  To approve the applicant’s  request
would not be fair or equitable to others in the  same  situation  that
missed promotion selection by a narrow margin and are not entitled  to
have an “after the fact” decoration count in  the  promotion  process.
The Promotion Management Section at the  Air  Force  Personnel  Center
(AFPC) disapproved the applicant’s  request  to  have  her  decoration
included in the promotion process as an exception to policy.   If  the
dates placed into the official channels were  changed,  it  would  not
automatically entitle her to be considered for any previous  promotion
cycles because it was not a matter of record at  the  time  selections
were made.

Based on the rationale provided they recommend denying  the  requested
relief.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on
11 July 2003, 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.    Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to  demonstrate
the existence of  probable  error  or  injustice.   After  thoroughly
reviewing the evidence of records, it appears that through  no  fault
of the applicant’s, the contested award was not properly processed in
time for it to be considered during promotion cycle  00E5.   In  this
respect, we note the  statements  from  the  applicant’s  supervisor,
Superintendent, of AFOSI Detachment 301, Region  3,  and  the  Chief,
Military Personnel regarding their  diligent  efforts  in  trying  to
follow-up on the progress of the award through the chain of  command.
Further, it also  appears  that  the  applicant’s  new  command  made
several inquiries regarding the whereabouts  of  the  award.   It  is
apparent that this was not an after-the-fact  award  based  upon  her
nonselection for promotion.   Clearly,  it  was  the  intent  of  the
applicant’s chain of command to have this award in her records during
the next promotion cycle, however,  due  to  numerous  administrative
shortfalls, the award “fell through the  cracks.”   In  view  of  the
foregoing, the Board is persuaded that the applicant should not  have
to bear the burden of her command  not  processing  the  award  in  a
timely manner.  Therefore, we recommend her 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  the  Recommendation
for Decoration Printout (RDP)(Décor-6), for the award of the Air Force
Achievement Medal (AFAM), covering the  period  31  May  1995  through
31 May 1999, was signed by the commander on 9 March 2000, rather  than
9 March 2001.

It  is  further  recommended  that  she   be   provided   supplemental
consideration for promotion to the grade of  staff  sergeant  for  all
appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 00E5, with the  AFAM  included
in her record.

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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2003-00838  in  Executive  Session  on  26  August  2003,  under   the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. John L. Robuck, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member
                 Ms. Sharon B. Seymour, Member

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

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 3 Mar 03, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 24 Jun 03.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 26 Jun 03.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Jul 03.




                 JOHN L. ROBUCK
                 Panel Chair







AFBCMR BC-2003-00838





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)(Décor-6), for the award of the Air Force
Achievement Medal (AFAM), covering the  period  31  May  1995  through
31 May 1999, was signed by the commander on 9 March 2000, rather  than
9 March 2001.

      It  is  further  directed  that  she  be  provided  supplemental
consideration for promotion to the grade of  staff  sergeant  for  all
appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 00E5, with the  AFAM  included
in her record.

     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