RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-00963
INDEX CODE: 107.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) be upgraded to the Meritorious
Service Medal (MSM).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He believes that award of the AFCM is a clear injustice based on his
documented sustained outstanding performance, leadership and overall
responsibility while assigned to the European Mission Support Squadron from
22 August 2002 to 13 July 2005.
In support of his request, the applicant provided a personal statement and
documentation extracted from his military personnel records.
His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant is currently serving on extended active duty in the grade of
master sergeant having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank
of 1 July 2003.
Applicant was awarded the AFCM, 2OLC for the period 23 August 2002 to 15
July 2005.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial. DPSIDR states the applicant was informed
that a recommendation had been submitted into official channels (signed by
the recommending official and endorsed by the next higher official in his
chain of command). The AFCM was the decoration he received and the
approval authority is standing by their decision.
The complete DPSIDR evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant reviewed the evaluation and states the approval authority did
not approve the decoration based on his three years of outstanding
performance as outlined in the decoration citation and the supporting
documents in the award package. The approval authority should read the
decoration and all supporting documents and then make a decision to
upgrade, downgrade, approve or disapprove if warranted. His decoration
clearly should have been upgraded after it was recommended for downgrade.
The submitted AFCM states that he assumed the position of the MPF
Superintendent as a master sergeant, a position normally held by a senior
master sergeant, and ensured uninterrupted support to over 1,860 personnel,
and that he personally managed what was identified as the best Case
Management Program in USAFE. He believes that after reading his decoration
the approval authority should have had several questions such as why is
this not being submitted as an MSM for this Senior Non-Commissioned Officer
(SNCO) who has done an outstanding job for the unit, command, and Air Force
as his supervisors and commanders have written in his evaluation while
assigned to the EMSS? Why is this same member receiving an evaluation with
a senior rater endorsement recommending immediate promotion to senior
master sergeant if he did not merit the appropriate medal commensurate with
his rank?
The applicant's complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________
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 an injustice. We thoroughly reviewed the evidence
of record and the applicant’s submission, and are not persuaded that
corrective action is warranted in this case. We find no evidence of an
error and are not persuaded by the applicant's uncorroborated assertions
that he has been the victim of an injustice. Evidence has not been
presented which would lead us to believe that the approval authority acted
inappropriately in deciding what type of medal was warranted or that he
abused his discretionary authority in rendering that decision.
Accordingly, 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 the evidence presented did not demonstrate the
existence of an 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2008-
00963 in Executive Session on 15 May 2008 under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
Mr. James G. Neighbors, Member
Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 February 2008, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIDR, dated 24 March 2008.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 April 2008.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 22 April 2008.
MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02399
It also recognizes single acts of merit or meritorious service if the achievement or service is of a lesser degree than that deemed worthy of the Legion of Merit; but such service must have been accomplished with distinction. The timeline for submitting a decoration is two years from the date of the act or achievement. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | bc-2003-02629
For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the application, and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit C. On 28 February 1995, the Board reconsidered his request based on additional evidence he provided. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR recommends the application be denied and states, in part, the applicant has not provided any new documentation, or any...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02764
The complete DPSOO evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on 26 October 2007 for review and response. Therefore, we agree with their recommendation that his records should be corrected to show that the AFCM (1OLC) was accepted for file prior to the convening of the board and that he receive SSB consideration. Exhibit C. Letter,...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00853
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-00853 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Meritorious Service Medal (MSM), Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) and his previously awarded AFCM be upgraded to the MSM, first oak leaf cluster (MSM w/1OLC). ...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-01113
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were sent to the applicant on 9 May and 16 Jun 08, respectively, for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, this office has received no response. Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has...
Her request for senior rater endorsement on the EPR should not be granted at this time. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and provides the wing commander’s concurrence of her request for senior rater indorsement. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice to warrant amending the MSM citation to include...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2006-03390 Disapproval
The AFPC/DPSIDR evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He did not realize this application was being submitted as a request for reconsideration of his MSM. Evidence has been presented that his decoration package was never forwarded through, or endorsed by, the deployed wing commander. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-02257
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIDR defers to the board for a decision in the applicant's request for award of the MSM w/1OLC. Therefore, based on the evidence provided, it appears that he did in fact receive the MSM w/1OLC upon his retirement from the Air Force. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Aug 08.
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-03112
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-03112 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to include the Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) on his DD Form 214. While the applicant was unable to provide a copy of the orders approving the MSM, he was able to provide a signed certificate and validated...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01327
He was considered but not selected for promotion to the grade of SMSgt during the 96, 97, 98, 99, 00 and 01, E-8 promotion cycles. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial of his request to change his DOR to SMSgt. The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSIDEP recommends denial of his request for supplemental promotion consideration to the grade of CMSgt, to remove his EPR ending 12 October 1990, and...