RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03806
INDEX CODE: 131.00
COUNSEL: None
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: Jun 16, 2008
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be granted reconsideration and recalculation of promotion for the Staff
Sergeant (E-5) 05E5 testing cycle based on a missing decoration.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The documentation for his Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) was lost
during manning changes within his squadron and not ordered until the same
month of promotion calculation. This resulted in the decoration missing
the cutoff date for the 05E5 testing cycle and caused him one crucial point
for promotion to E-5.
In support of his request, the applicant provided a copy of his AFCM
Special Order, GA-009, and weighted airman promotion system score notices
for cycles 06E5 and 05E5.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant was not selected for promotion to E-5 during the 05E5 testing
cycle. He missed promotion to E-5 by less than one point.
He was awarded the AFCM as reflected on Special Order, GA-009, dated 12 Dec
05. The Décor 6, Request for Decoration Printout (RDP), date reflects 31
Aug 05. The promotion eligibility cutoff date (PECD) for cycle 05E5 was 31
Mar 05.
The applicant was selected for promotion to E-5 during the 06E5 cycle.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPPWB recommends denial. Current Air Force promotion policy (AFI 36-
2502, Airman Promotion Program, Table 2.2, Rule 5, Note 2) dictates that
before a decoration is credited for a specific promotion cycle, the
closeout date of the decoration must be on or before the PECD, and the date
of the Décor 6 must be before the date of the selections for the cycle in
question. The PECD in question was 31 Mar 05.
In addition, a decoration that a member claims was lost, downgraded, etc.,
must be fully documented and verified that it was placed into official
channels prior to the selection date.
The applicant provides no documentation (such as e-mail traffic or letters
from his chain of command) to prove that he aggressively pursued the status
of his decoration from the time it was initiated until the date of
discovery on 15 Jan 06 (4 months after the promotion release date).
He then waited another 11 months before petitioning the AFBCMR on 6 Dec 06.
In accordance with AFI 36-2803, The Air Force Awards and Decorations
Program, 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. The Décor 6 was not provided with the application; however, the
RDP date reflected on the special orders is 31 Aug 05. There is no
indication the applicant’s decoration package was placed into official
channels until 31 Aug 05 or later, which was after promotions for the 05E5
cycle were announced, 10 Aug 05, and the applicant became aware he missed
promotion by less than one point.
The AFPC/DPPPWB complete evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 12 Jan
07 for review and comment within 30 days. The applicant provided evidence
he contends shows that his decoration was initiated prior to 10 Aug 05.
His evidence consists of a statement, e-mails, statements from two
individuals within his chain of command, a document on calculating Air
Force weighted promotion factors, and a compact disc (CD ROM) with an
additional e-mail.
The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit C
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. 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 office of primary
responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that
the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. 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 Docket Number BC-2006-03806
in Executive Session on 27 February 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
Mr. Wallace F. Beard, Member
Ms. Karen A. Holloman, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 6 Dec 06.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 18 Dec 06.
Exhibit C. Applicant’s Rebuttal, dated 8 Feb 07 w/Atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Jan 07.
KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
Panel Chair
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...
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, AFPC/DPPPWB, also reviewed this application and indicated that the applicant’s total promotion score for the 99E5 cycle is 275.76 and the score required for selection in his Control Air Force Specialty Code (CAFSC) was 276.70. Current Air Force promotion policy dictates that, before a decoration is credited for a specific promotion cycle, the closeout date of the decoration must be on...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01560
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01560 INDEX CODE: 131.00 XXXXXXX R. COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 23 NOV 07 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be considered for supplemental promotion to the grade of technical sergeant for cycle 05E6. It is further recommended that he be provided supplemental consideration for...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00026
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Her AFAM should be considered for the 06E6 promotion cycle because the Décor 6 was dated 22 September 2005 and the nomination package was submitted before the Promotion Eligibility Promotion Cutoff Date (PECD). They state that 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 PECD, and...
A complete copy of the Air Force Evaluation is at Exhibit C. The Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, also reviewed this application and indicated that the applicant stated the wrong cycle and he actually means the 93A5 cycle, which he missed selection by less than 3 points. Current Air Force promotion policy dictates 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01993
The applicant contends that the 1 Mar 01 closeout date was an administrative error and that the correct closeout date should have been 1 Apr 00. Had the medal been considered, he would have been selected for promotion. The applicant requested supplemental promotion consideration and his request was denied because resubmission of the AFCM was initiated after the date selections were made for the 01E6 cycle, 31 May 2001.
The applicant contends that the 1 Mar 01 closeout date was an administrative error and that the correct closeout date should have been 1 Apr 00. Had the medal been considered, he would have been selected for promotion. The applicant requested supplemental promotion consideration and his request was denied because resubmission of the AFCM was initiated after the date selections were made for the 01E6 cycle, 31 May 2001.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01257
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01257 INDEX CODE: 131.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 16 OCT 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The date of his original and reaccomplished Décor-6 be changed to reflect 15 July 2003 and the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) with 3rd Oak Leaf Cluster (OLC) covering the period 20...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02750
The inclusive date of the AFCM is March 1997 to August 2000, in accordance with AFI 36-2803, The Air Force Awards and Decorations Program, paragraph 3.4.2., the effective date of all decorations is the closing date of the service period recognized regardless of the order date. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR reviewed applicant's request and states that the decoration was submitted into official channels and awarded within...
DPPPWB stated that, as evidenced by the special order awarding the applicant's AFCM, the decoration did not meet the criteria for promotion credit during the 96E7 cycle because the RDP date was 22 Aug 96--after selections were made on 25 May 96 for the 96E7 cycle. 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...