RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01480
INDEX CODE: 107.00
XXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: Mr. Ryan
XXXXXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 10 SEP 2006
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be corrected to show the Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM)
First Oak Leaf Cluster (1/OLC) be reinstated and he be provided
supplemental promotion consideration to the grade of technical sergeant.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Documentation denying him the AFAM 1/OLC was forged. The AFAM was
awarded for an exemplary act and not for a cancelled permanent change of
station (PCS) assignment.
In support of his request, the applicant submits a copy of Memorandum,
Investigation Findings for Decoration Revocation Order, dated 2 March
2005, a Memorandum for Record, Duty Performance Supporting
Documentation, Special Order GA-323, Citation for award of the AFAM
1/OLC, dated 26 March 2003, a background email from his chain of command
on update of decoration, Letters of Training, Letters of Achievement and
documents relating to other achievements.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 6 August 1991 for a
term of 4 years. He was progressively promoted to the grade of staff
sergeant and selected for promotion to the grade of technical sergeant
during the CY06 E-6 promotion cycle.
He was awarded the AFAM 1/OLC for meritorious service on
10 September 2002. The AFAM 1/OLC was revoked per Special Order GA-323,
dated 26 March 2003.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The AFPC/DPPPR recommends denial. DPPPR states the applicant provided a
copy of a signed DÉCOR-6 by the 20th Component Repair Squadron Commander
non-recommending him for award of a decoration. The applicant contends
this document was a forgery and that the applicant’s overwritten name
was incorrect and shows a discrepancy.
According to DPPPR, it appears the questioned AFAM was awarded for
meritorious service pending a scheduled PCS move by the applicant and
was approved per Special Order GA-1010, dated 10 September 2002. His
PCS assignment was cancelled, therefore, the basis for award of the AFAM
1/OLC no longer existed, and revocation was justified and in accordance
with AFI 36-2803, paragraph 3.7.
DPPPR states on 2 March 2005, the 20th Component Maintenance Squadron
Commander investigated the applicant’s claim for reinstatement of the
AFAM 1/OLC. The commander concluded the basis for award of the AFAM
1/OLC no longer existed due to the PCS assignment being cancelled and
that revocation of the AFAM 1/OLC was appropriate.
The DPPPR 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 10
Jun 05, for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, this
office has received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
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 an error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant’s
complete submission in judging the merits of the case. However, we are
not persuaded by the evidence presented in support of his appeal, that
the AFAM 1/OLC should be reinstated or that the applicant should be
given supplemental promotion consideration. The Board notes, the Unit
Commander conducted an investigation and concluded that the AFAM 1/OLC
was intended to recognize the applicant for meritorious service for the
period 22 October 2000 to 10 July 2002 and not for a single act. The
Commander also concluded that the applicant’s planned PCS assignment for
the summer of 2002 was cancelled and revocation was most likely
warranted when it was determined the basis of the award no longer
existed. In this regard, we note that in accordance with AFI 36-2803,
paragraph 3.7.1, the awarding authority revokes an award when the basis
for the award no longer exists. Therefore, the Board believes the
awarding authority took the appropriate action to revoke the AFAM 1/OLC.
In addition, since no basis exists to reinstate award of the AFAM
1/OLC, the applicant’s request for supplemental promotion consideration
is denied. In regards to the applicant’s assertion that a non
recommendation for a decoration within his personal information file was
forged, evidence provided by the applicant does not substantiate his
claim. Further, the applicant has failed to quantify the relevancy of
the DÉCOR-6, dated 28 March 2001, as it relates to AFAM 1/OLC and its
subsequent revocation. In the absence of persuasive 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 a 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 Docket Number BC-2005-
01480 in Executive Session on 9 August 2005, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Panel Chair
Ms. Renee M. Collier, Member
Mr. Richard K. Hartley, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 Apr 05, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 26 May 05.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Jun 05.
LAURENCE M. GRONER
Panel Chair
The remaining 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 at Exhibits B and C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR reviewed applicant's request and states that the letters attached to his application show that the initial paperwork submitted in November 2000 was not a final recommendation package,...
In support of his request applicant provided copies of email communications, documents associated with his request for supplemental promotion consideration, his RDP, his AFAM, his AFAM orders, documents associated with the AFAM recommendation package, extracts from AFI 36-2803, Air Force Awards and Decoration Program; AFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion Program; and the 86 Airlift Wing Awards and Decorations Guide; and, his AF Form 77, Supplemental Evaluation Sheet. Additional relevant facts...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01028
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01028 INDEX CODE: 131.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Special Order G-065 dated 17 February 2004, awarding him the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) be corrected to reflect the date of the original Recommendation for Decoration Printout (DÉCOR 6) requested in October 2002. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01576
His Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) be upgraded to a Airman’s Medal (AmnM) for action performed on 13 November 1982. b. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: On 1 October 1984, he was awarded an Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM) for Heroism for his actions on 13 November 1982. A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S...
Current Air Force promotion policy dictates that before a decoration is credited for a specific 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 DÉCOR-6, Request for Decoration Printout (RDP), must be before the date of selection for the cycle in question. AFPC/DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01960
Current Air Force promotion policy (AFI 36-2502, Table 2.2, Rule 5, Note 2) dictates that before a decoration is credited for a specific 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 DECOR-6, must be before the date of selections for the cycle in question. No evidence was presented which showed to the Board majority’s satisfaction that the decoration was placed in official channels prior to the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00838
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). 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02326
Current Air Force promotion policy, AFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion Program, Table 2.2, Rule 5, Note 2, {sic – should be Rule 7} dictates that before a decoration is credited for a specific promotion cycle, the close-out date of the decoration must be on or before the PECD, and the date of the DÉCOR-6, Request for Decoration Printout (RDP), must be before the date of selections for the cycle in question. Although the Board is sympathetic to the applicant’s near-miss for promotion, evidence...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00316
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 05E7. The letter from the applicant’s commander is duly noted; however, we do not...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02511
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The Air Force historically awards the LOM to colonels and above while the MSM is awarded to lieutenant colonels and below. On 22 Mar 04, the Board considered and granted the applicant's request for consideration for promotion to the grade of colonel by an SSB. Applicant notes that in accordance with the AFI the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council is the approval authority, the entire career...