RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01093
                       INDEX CODE:  107.00
                       COUNSEL:  None

                       HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be considered for supplemental promotion consideration to the grade
of master sergeant for cycle 02E7, with the inclusion of his Air Force
Achievement Medal with Second Oak Leaf Cluster (AFAM/2OLC).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The decoration was in the  system  before  the  Promotion  Eligibility
Cutoff  Date (PECD)  and  the  DÉCOR 6 was   generated   prior  to  31
December 2002.  His commander had a rigorous TDY schedule and pressing
family matters, which resulted in a subsequent move to  ---  AFB,  GA,
and his decoration fell through the cracks.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving in the Regular  Air  Force  in  the
grade of technical sergeant.

Promotion selections for the cycle 02E7 were made  on  17  June  2002,
with a public release on 27 June 2002.  The total  weighted  promotion
score required for selection in the applicant’s  Air  Force  Specialty
Code (AFSC) was 325.89.  The applicant’s total weighted promotion  was
325.18.

On 12 August 2002, a Recommendation for Decoration Printout (RDP)  was
prepared on the applicant for the  purpose  of  recommending  him  for
AFAM/2OLC.

Per General Order ---, dated 26  September  2002,  the  applicant  was
awarded the AFAM/2OLC for the  period  19  November  2001  through  21
December 2001.  The AFAM/2OLC is worth one 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.  The  PECD
for cycle 02E7 was 31 December 2001.

The decoration was not considered in the promotion process  for  cycle
02E7.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR STAFF EVALUATION:

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 02E7 because his commander did not place the DÉCOR 6 into
official channels until 12 August  2002,  after  selections  had  been
announced and score notices were produced.  This policy was  initiated
to  preclude  personnel  from  submitting  someone  after   promotions
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 02E7 and his becoming aware  that  he  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  his  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  him  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 Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR STAFF EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 2
May 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.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of  error  or  injustice  warranting  the  applicant  be
provided supplemental promotion consideration to the grade  of  master
sergeant with the inclusion of the Air Force  Achievement  Medal  with
Second  Oak  Leaf  Cluster  (AFAM/2OLC).   We  took  notice   of   the
applicant's complete submission in judging the  merits  of  the  case;
however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force
and adopt their rationale as the  basis  for  our  decision  that  the
applicant has failed to sustain his burden that he has suffered either
an error or an injustice.  In order for a decoration to be eligible to
be considered  in  a  promotion  cycle,  the  close-out  date  of  the
decoration must be on or before the Promotion Eligibility Cutoff  Date
and the Recommendation for Decoration Printout must be before the date
of selection  for  the  cycle.   From  the  evidence  of  record,  the
applicant’s decoration does not meet the criteria to be considered for
promotion consideration for cycle 02E7.  In this respect we  note  the
RDP was not put into official channels until well after the  selection
date.  The letter  from  the  applicant’s  commander  is  duly  noted;
however, we do not find this statement, alone, sufficiently compelling
to  warrant  adding  the  decoration  to  the   record   and   provide
supplemental promotion consideration.  Rather it appears  to  us  that
this statement is a well-meaning, after-the-fact attempt  to  get  the
applicant promoted.  Such motivations are not sufficient to support  a
finding that  the  applicant’s  record  was  incomplete  at  the  time
selections were made.  To allow the applicant another opportunity  for
promotion consideration would be unfair to other military  members  in
similar situations.  Therefore, in the  absence  of  evidence  to  the
contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief
sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2003-01093 in Executive Session on 10 June 2003, under the  provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

                       Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
                       Mr. Christopher Carey, Member
                       Mr. Gregory A. Parker, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 24 Mar 03, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 22 Apr 03.
      Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 May 03.




                             RICHARD A. PETERSON
                             Panel Chair






MEMORANDUM FOR   THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF
                   MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR)
FROM: SAF/MR

SUBJECT:    AFBCMR Case on

      I have carefully considered the circumstances of this case and do not
agree with the AFBCMR panel that the applicant’s requests should be denied.

      The applicant was considered for promotion to the grade of MSgt during
cycle 02E7.  He had a total weighted score of 325.18, whereas the score
needed for selection in his Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) was 325.89.
Promotion selections were made on June 17, 2002 and announced on June 27,
2002.  Applicant’s commander signed the Recommendation for Decoration
Printout (DÉCOR 6) on August 2, 2002, recommending the applicant for award
of the Air Force Achievement Medal, Second Oak Leaf Cluster (AFAM/2OLC) for
the period November 19, 2001 through December 21, 2001.  The decoration was
awarded to the applicant on September 26, 2002, but was not factored into
his score because the DÉCOR 6 was not placed into official channels until
August 2, 2002, after selections for cycle 02E7 were announced.  Had the
award been factored into the applicant’s score, he would have been selected
for promotion to the grade of MSgt.


      Applicant appealed to the Board requesting the AFAM/2OLC be included
in his records and he be provided supplemental promotion consideration to
the grade of MSgt.  He provided a letter from his former commander
explaining the circumstances regarding the late submission of the DÉCOR 6.
On June 10, 2003, the Board considered and denied the applicant’s requests
on the basis that the decoration did not meet the criteria for promotion
consideration for cycle 02E7.  Specifically, Air Force policy dictates for
a decoration to be considered in a promotion cycle, its close-out date must
be on or before the promotion eligibility cut-off date (PECD) and the date
of the DÉCOR 6 must be on or before the date of selections for the cycle in
question.  Further, in the Board’s opinion, the commander’s letter was
simply an after-the-fact attempt to get the applicant promoted.  As
indicated earlier, I disagree.


      In arriving at my decision, I note the applicant’s commander, who is
also the Wing Inspector General, asserts that he requested a DÉCOR 6, which
was prepared on December 19, 2001, before the PECD, recommending the
applicant for the AFAM.  However, through a series of administrative
oversights, the DÉCOR 6 “fell through the cracks” and was not processed by
his staff before the selections for the promotion cycle were announced.
Having no basis to question the integrity of the commander, I believe the
benefit of any doubt should be resolved in favor of the applicant.
Accordingly, it is my decision the applicant’s requests be granted.





                                       MICHAEL L. DOMINGUEZ
                                       Assistant Secretary
                                       (Manpower and Reserve Affairs)






      AFBCMR BC-2003-01093

      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), Second Oak Leaf Cluster (2OLC), covering the
period 19 November 2001 through 21 December 2001, was signed by the
commander on XXXXX, rather than XXXXXX.

      It is further directed that he be provided supplemental consideration
for promotion to the grade of master sergeant for all appropriate cycles
beginning with cycle 02E7, with the AFAM 2OLC included in his 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