Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2006-03866
Original file (BC-2006-03866.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                                 ADDENDUM TO
                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

      IN THE MATTER OF:            DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-03866
            INDEX CODE: 110.00
      XXXXXXX                     COUNSEL:  NONE
                                   HEARING DESIRED:  NO

______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He receive proficiency pay for receiving outstanding performance reports.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 14 December  2006  the  applicant  submitted  an  appeal  to  the  Board
requesting:

1.  He be awarded the Bronze  Star  Medal  (BSM),  first  oak  leaf  cluster
(1OLC), the Air Force  Commendation  Medal  (AFCM),  (2OLC),  and  the  AFCM
(3OLC).

2.  Block 23a of his DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United  States  Report
of Transfer or Discharge be changed to reflect Structural Superintendent.

3.  He be administratively promoted to senior master  sergeant  (SMSgt)  and
chief master sergeant (CMSgt).

4.  His service-connected medical conditions of Impaired  Hearing,  Tinnitus
and Hypertension, be assessed as combat-related  in  order  to  qualify  for
compensation under the Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC) Act.

5.  His Foreign Service time be changed from three years to eight years.

6.  His Good Conduct Medal (GCM) show six oak leaf  clusters  (OLC)  instead
of four.

AFPC verified his entitlement  to  the  BSM  w/1  OLC,  AFCM  w/2  OLC,  and
corrected his records to reflect these awards.  AFPC corrected block 23a  to
reflect Structural Technician.   In  addition,  his  foreign  service  of  8
years, 6 months and 16 days had been accounted for on his DD Form 214.

On 2 November 2007, the Board considered and denied his remaining requests.
 For an accounting of the facts surrounding his previous requests  and  the
rationale of the Board's earlier decision, see the Record of Proceedings at
Exhibit K.

On 13 December 2007, the applicant submitted a letter requesting the  Board
address his request pertaining to proficiency pay.  He states his  military
records demonstrated that he should have been promoted to the rank of SMSgt
and CMSgt.  He does not believe his military records were ever presented to
a promotion board for consideration.  If his records were  submitted,  they
did not include the second BSM and the AFCM he received 30 years later.  It
is inconceivable  to  understand  why  he  was  never  promoted  with  such
outstanding performance reports, commander recommendations and  outstanding
accomplishments.   In  his  previous  request,  he  raised  the  issue   of
proficiency pay stating  the  Board  did  not  address  it.   His  complete
submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit L.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to  demonstrate  that  the
applicant has been the victim of an error or  injustice  warranting  further
correction to his record.  Although the applicant  believes  his  record  of
performance justifies  his  promotion,  he  has  not  provided  evidence  to
support his claim.  Additionally, he did not present sufficient evidence  to
show that  the  decorations  that  AFPC/DPPPR  verified  he  had  previously
received  were  not  appropriately  considered  in  the  promotion  process.
Although the Bronze Star Medal  (First  Oak  Leaf  Cluster)  and  Air  Force
Commendation Medal (Second Oak Leaf Cluster) were not listed on his DD  Form
214, that in no way supports his contention they were  not  a  part  of  his
record during promotion consideration.  We note that  the  DD  Form  214  is
produced upon a member’s separation from active  duty.   An  error  on  this
document  does  not  support  a  conclusion  that  his  record  itself   was
incorrect.  Unfortunately, as pointed out by AFPC/DPPPWB, due to the  length
of time he waited to file his application, promotion data pertaining to  him
is no longer available.  This also applies to his  request  for  proficiency
pay.  Therefore, based upon the presumption of regularity in the conduct  of
governmental affairs and without evidence to the contrary,  we  must  assume
that the issues the applicant raises were properly handled.   Based  on  our
review of the available evidence, we do not  find  that  the  applicant  has
been the  victim  of  an  injustice.   Therefore,  based  on  the  available
evidence of record, we find no basis  upon  which  to  favorably  reconsider
this application.

________________________________________________________________


THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice; the application was  denied  without  a
personal appearance; and  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  BC-2006-03866  in  Executive
Session on 11 August 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
                 Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member
                 Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

Exhibit K.  Record of Proceedings, dated 27 November 2007,
w/Exhibits.
Exhibit L.  Letter, Applicant dated 13 December 2007.




            THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
            Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03866

    Original file (BC-2006-03866.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant believes his Impaired Hearing and Tinnitus were caused by the noise exposure he experienced while performing duties as a senior woodworker. After a thorough review of the available evidence and the applicant’s complete submission, we find no evidence that he was awarded the AFCM 3OLC. Nor do we find evidence showing that his records should be corrected to show he was promoted to any grade higher than that currently reflected.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01558

    Original file (BC-2002-01558.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01558 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) be corrected to reflect award of the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM), and the AFCM, Second Oak Leaf Cluster (2OLC). The Air Force has...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-04047

    Original file (BC-2003-04047.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-04047 INDEX CODE: 100.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. The applicant did not perform any duties in AFSC 3A051. After a thorough review of the applicant’s records and the evidence provided it appears the applicant’s DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9900305

    Original file (9900305.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    He also directed that the applicant be provided supplemental promotion consideration with her corrected record. On 5 Dec 96, the Board recommended that the applicant’s records be corrected to reflect that the EPR rendered for the period 31 Mar 90 through 18 Feb 91 be accepted for file in its proper sequence; that the EPR rendered for the period 31 Mar 90 through 18 Jun 91 be amended in Section I to show the period of the report as 19 Feb 91 through 18 Jun 91 and the reason for the report as...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0103223

    Original file (0103223.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-03223 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His record, to include the Air Force Commendation Medal, Second Oak Leaf Cluster (AFCM, 2 OLC), be considered for promotion to the grade of major by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for the Calendar Year 2001A (CY01A) Central Major Selection Board. As a...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02017

    Original file (BC-2006-02017.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Therefore the only remaining issue before the Board is the award of the ICM. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant 15 September 2006, for review and response. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2006-01452

    Original file (BC-2006-01452.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01452 INDEX CODE: 131.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 13 November 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be promoted to the grade of Chief Master Sergeant (CMSgt) as if selected during promotion cycle 77S9. According to AFR 4-20, Table 35-12, Rule 29, Records Disposition Schedule,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01039

    Original file (BC-2006-01039.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Promotion selections for the cycle 05E7 were made on 6 June 2005. 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 selections for the cycle in question. Applicant’s request for supplemental promotion consideration based on the AFCM, 2OLC, was denied by AFPC because the resubmitted...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01587

    Original file (BC-2010-01587.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Everyone received a medal but him. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. Additionally, the applicant cannot recommend himself for entitlement to a decoration.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01576

    Original file (BC-2002-01576.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    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...