RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-00963
            INDEX CODE:  131.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  30 SEP 07

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Officer Selection Record (OSR)  for  the  Calendar  Year  2005A  (CY05A)
Lieutenant Colonel (Lt Col) Central Selection Board (CSB)  be  corrected  to
include the citation for  the  Meritorious  Service  Medal  (MSM),  for  the
period 18 June 2002 to 22 April 2005 and that she receive Special  Selection
Board (SSB) consideration for promotion to the  grade  of  Lt  Col  for  the
CY05A Selection Board.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The MSM was not processed in a timely manner.  She had  a  permanent  change
of station (PCS) from Eglin AFB, Florida,  (April  2005)  to  Sheppard  AFB,
Texas, resulting in a delay and documentation not being  available  for  her
official record at the time of the CY05 Lt Col promotion board.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving on extended  active  duty  (EAD)  in  the
grade of major effective and with a date of rank (DOR) of 1 November 2000.

The applicant was considered and not selected for promotion to the grade  of
Lt Col by the CY05A Lt Col Selection Board, which convened on 6 July 2005.





Special Order  G-609,  dated  5  December  2005,  awarded  the  MSM  to  the
applicant for service performed during the period 18 June 2002 to  22  April
2005.

The citation accompanying  the  Meritorious  Service  Medal  (MSM)  for  the
period 18 June 2002 to 22 April 2005 was not filed in  the  applicant’s  OSR
when it met the CY05A Central Lt Col Selection Board  which  convened  on  6
July 2005.

OPR profile since 1998 follows:

           PERIOD ENDING             EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL

                  1 Dec 98   Meets Standards (MS)
                 30 Apr 99                   (MS)
                 30 Apr 00                   (MS)
                 20 Aug 01   Training Report (TR)
                 19 May 02                   (TR)
                 19 May 03                   (MS)
                 19 May 04                   (MS)
                  8 Apr 05                   (MS)

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPO recommended denial indicating  they  determined  the  applicant’s
MSM was processed within the  guidelines  of  AFI  36-2803,  paragraph  3.1.
These guidelines state that decoration  recommendations  are  entered  “into
official channels within two years and awarded within  three  years  of  the
act, achievement, or service performed.”  Furthermore,  in  accordance  with
published guidance, the  decoration  award  authority  announces  its  final
decision when approving  an  award  by  publishing  special  orders.   These
orders serve as the source document  for  updating  the  decoration  in  the
Military Personnel  Data  System  (MilPDS).   Because  the  order  for  this
decoration was published on 5 December 2005, the citation was  not  included
in her OSR nor was it reflected in any  of  their  official  personnel  data
systems when the board convened.  Backdating the special  order  to  a  date
prior to the CSB would be a departure from current Air Force  policy.   They
do not see a compelling reason to grant an exception in this regard.

Each  officer  eligible  for  promotion  consideration  is  advised  of  the
entitlement to communicate with the board president  to  call  attention  to
any matter of record concerning them that they believe  important  to  their
consideration.  As such, the applicant had the option to write a  letter  to
the board members informing them of the missing  MSM.   They  have  verified
that she did not elect to exercise this entitlement.




Should the AFBCMR grant the relief sought, they recommend the  date  on  the
special order awarding the MSM and the “GIVEN UNDER MY  HAND”  date  on  the
citation be amended to a date prior to the board convening date  of  6  July
2005; file the corrected citation in her OSR, and  update  the  MSM  on  her
Officer Selection Brief (OSB) for the CY05A board.

The evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 28 April 2006, 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.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to  demonstrate  the
existence of an error or injustice.  The applicant’s  contentions  are  duly
noted; however, after thoroughly  reviewing  the  evidence  of  record,  the
majority of the Board is not persuaded that her records were  incomplete  at
the time she was considered for promotion to the grade  of  Lt  Col  by  the
CY05A Lt Col CSB.  While it is true the period covered by the  MSM,  18 June
2002 to 22 April 2005, ended before the convening date of the CY05A  Lt  Col
CSB, the decoration was not awarded until  the  order  was  published  on  5
December 2005, well after the board’s convening date of 6  July  2005.   The
majority notes because the official order was not  published  prior  to  the
convening of the promotion board, the award  did  not  exist  and,  was  not
required to be in her record.  Also, the applicant has not established  that
her rating chain failed to process the award in a timely  manner.   In  this
respect, the Board majority notes that  in  accordance  with  the  governing
instruction, the  rating  chain  had  up  to  two  years  to  recommend  the
applicant for the decoration.  Therefore, the majority of the  Board  agrees
with the opinion  and  recommendation  of  the  Air  Force  and  adopts  its
rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant  has  not  been
the victim of an error or injustice.  In the  absence  of  evidence  to  the
contrary, the majority of the Board finds no compelling basis  to  recommend
granting the requested relief.
_________________________________________________________________


THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The majority of the panel finds insufficient evidence of error or  injustice
and recommends the application be denied.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number  BC-2006-
00963 in Executive Session on 1 June 2006, under the provisions of  AFI  36-
2603:


                 Mr. James W. Russell III, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member
                 Mr. Vance E. Lineberger, Member

Mr. Russell and Mr. Blomgren recommended denial  of  the  application.   Mr.
Lineberger voted to grant the applicant’s request  but  does  not  desire  a
minority report.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 March 2006, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 19 April 2006, w/atch.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 April 2006, w/atch.




                       JAMES W. RUSSELL III
                       Panel Chair




AFBCMR DOCKET NUMBER 2006-00963






MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD
                                          FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY
RECORDS (AFBCMR)

SUBJECT:  AFBCMR Application of

      I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the
recommendation of the Board members.  The majority found that applicant
had not provided sufficient evidence of error or injustice and
recommended the case be denied.  I concur with that finding and their
conclusion that relief is not warranted.  Accordingly, I accept their
recommendation that the application be denied.

      Please advise the applicant accordingly.





                       JOE G. LINEBERGER
                       Director
                       Air Force Review Boards Agency