RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-01069
            INDEX CODE:  131.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  31 SEPTEMBER 2006

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM), First Oak Leaf Cluster (1OLC),  for
the period 11 March 1999 through  17  October  2003  be  considered  in  the
promotion process for cycle 04E6 to the grade of technical sergeant.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her AFAM 1OLC should be considered in the promotion process for  cycle  04E6
to technical sergeant because of the circumstances which  caused  the  delay
in the processing of the award.  She further indicates  she  has  supporting
documentation that supports the fact that the  paperwork  went  through  the
proper channels twice, and was lost both times.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 6  September  1990.   She
continued to reenlist contracting her last enlistment on 7 July 2000  for  a
period of six years.  She  is  currently  serving  in  the  grade  of  staff
sergeant effective and with a date of rank (DOR) of 1 November 1998.

The applicant’s total weighted  promotion  score  for  the  cycle  04E6  was
307.21 and the score  required  for  selection  in  her  Control  Air  Force
Specialty Code (CAFSC) was 308.18.  If the decoration (worth  three  points)
is counted in the applicant’s total score, she would  become  a  select  for
promotion  pending   a   favorable   data   verification   check   and   the
recommendation of her commander.  Promotion selections for this  cycle  were
made on 17 June 2004 with a public release date of 24 June 2004.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPWB recommended denial indicating as evidenced by the special  order
awarding the applicant’s AFCM this decoration does  not  meet  the  criteria
for promotion credit during the 03E5 [sic] cycle  because  the  request  for
decoration printout (RDP) date is 5 October 2004  -  after  selections  were
made on 17 June 2004 for the 04E6  cycle.   This  policy  was  initiated  28
February 1979 to specifically preclude personnel  from  subsequently  (after
promotion  selections)  submitting  someone  for   a   decoration   with   a
retroactive decoration effective date (close out) so as  to  put  them  over
the selection cutoff  score.   Exceptions  to  the  above  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  in  military  channels  within  the
prescribed time limit and conclusive evidence  the  recommendation  was  not
acted upon through loss or inadvertence.  IAW AFI 36-2803, paragraph  3.1  a
decoration is considered to have been placed  into  official  channels  when
the decoration recommendation is  signed  by  the  initiating  official  and
indorsed by a higher official in the chain of command.   Again,  resubmitted
decorations (because an initial decoration was downgraded, lost, etc.)  must
be placed into official channels prior  to  the  promotion  selection  date.
There is no indication this  package  was  reaccomplished  and  placed  into
official  channels  until  5  October  2004  (RDP  date),  which  was  after
promotions for the  04E6  cycle  were  announced  (24  June  2004)  and  the
applicant became aware she missed promotion by less than one  point.   As  a
matter of information, the Décor-6 submitted with this application, as  well
as the administrative supplemental package, was blank.  It did  not  include
the type of decoration,  inclusive  dates,  supervisor’s  signature/date  or
commander’s signature/date.

After an extensive review of the  circumstances  of  this  case  to  include
documentation the applicant provided, there is no  conclusive  evidence  the
lost decoration was resubmitted before the date of selections for  the  04E6
cycle.  While they are acutely aware of the impact this  recommendation  has
on the  applicant’s  career,  the  fact  is  the  lost  decoration  was  not
resubmitted until after selections for this cycle  were  made.   To  approve
the applicant’s request would not be fair or equitable  to  many  others  in
the same situation who miss promotion selection by a narrow margin  and  are
not entitled to have an “after the fact” decoration count in  the  promotion
process.  The applicant’s request to have the  decoration  included  in  the
promotion process for cycle 04E6 as an exception to policy  was  disapproved
by the Enlisted Promotion Management  Branch  at  the  Air  Force  Personnel
Center on 7 February 2005.  They concur with that decision.

The evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 6 May 2005, a copy of the Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant for review and response within 30  days.   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  an  error  or  injustice.   After  thoroughly  reviewing  the
evidence of  record,  it  appears  the  contested  award  was  not  properly
processed in time for it to be considered by promotion cycle 04E6.  In  this
respect, we note the applicant made due diligence in assuring the award  was
in her record prior to the convening of the supplemental board.  Through  no
fault of her own, the award package was accomplished, lost,  reaccomplished,
and lost again.  We find this to be true as evident  by  the  email  traffic
between the applicant and the  Medical  Services  Flight  NCOIC,  82ND  MDOS
Secretary, and from Capt B from  the  82nd  MDOS/SGOSO.   Further,  it  also
appears  the  applicant’s  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.  We  also  note
the  statement  from  her  commander  which  indicates  he  recommends   the
applicant  be  considered  for  supplemental  promotion.   She   meets   the
requirements for supplemental consideration.   The  applicant  and  Major  B
have been proactive an aggressive to rectify the error.  He  fully  supports
her request for supplemental consideration.   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 Commendation  Medal
(AFCM), First Oak Leaf Cluster (1OLC), covering the  period  11  March  1999
through 17 October 2003, was signed by the commander on 15 June 2004  rather
than 5 October 2004.

It is further  recommended  that  the  applicant  be  provided  supplemental
consideration for promotion to the grade  of  technical  sergeant  beginning
with cycle 04E6.

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.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered  AFBCMR  Docket  Number  2005-
01069 in Executive Session on 16 June 2005, under the provisions of AFI  36-
2603:

                 Ms. Martha J. Evans, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member
                 Mr. Jay H. Jordan, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 18 March 2005, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 21 April 2005.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 May 2005.




                 MARTHA J. EVANS
                 Panel Chair
AFBCMR BC-2005-01069





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
Commendation Medal (AFCM), First Oak Leaf Cluster (1OLC), covering the
period 11 March 1999 through 17 October 2003, was signed by the commander
on 15 June 2004, rather than 5 October 2004.

      It is further directed that she be provided supplemental
consideration for promotion to the grade of technical sergeant for all
appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 04E6, with the AFCM 1OLC 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
qualifications for the promotion.




            JOE G. LINEBERGER
            Director
            Air Force Review Boards Agency