RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2009-02522
            INDEX CODE:  107.00; 131.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  He be awarded the Meritorious Service Medal (MSM).

2.  His line number for the Nov 08 promotion cycle to the  grade  of  master
sergeant (MSgt) be restored.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His Virtual Military Personnel Flight (VMPF), Data Verification Brief  (DVB)
indicates he was awarded the MSM via special order number 283.

He requested a copy of the medal but was informed that he  did  not  need  a
copy because it was in the VMPF.  After he was  selected  for  promotion  to
MSgt, he noticed the MSM was not in his records.  He `had  a  letter  signed
by his commander stating he did not have  a  physical  copy  of  the  medal;
however, his line number was still pulled.

In support of the application, the applicant  submits  copies  of  his  DVB,
awards  and  decoration  information,  email  communications,  and   special
orders.

The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Information extracted from the Automated Records  Management  System  (ARMS)
indicates the applicant has been progressively  promoted  to  the  grade  of
technical sergeant, having assumed that grade effective and with a  date  of
rank of 1 Apr 06.

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 C & D.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial.   DPSIDR  notes  the  VMPF  data  printout
provided by the applicant indicates an MSM was  approved  on  2  Jul  01  by
Special Order (SO) GC-283; however, the official SO 283 approves  the  award
of the Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM) for two other individuals.

DPSIDR states it  appears  the  applicant’s  official  military  record  was
updated  erroneously.   His  former  training  squadron  is  listed  as  the
approval authority; however, they do not have approval authority  for  award
of  the  MSM.   Additionally,  the  applicant  did  not   provide   official
documentation from anyone in his then direct chain  of  command  that  could
validate his recommendation for the MSM.

Examiner’s Note:  During the period in question, the applicant  was  awarded
the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM), 2nd Oak Leaf Cluster (2OLC).

The complete DPSIDR evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ  AFPC/DPSOE  recommends  denial.   DPSOE   states   the   applicant   was
tentatively selected for promotion to the  grade  of  MSgt  for  cycle  08E7
during the Nov 08 in-system supplemental process.   His  line  number  would
have incremented on 1 Jul 08; however, when  he  was  initially  considered,
the promotion file at the  Air  Force  Personnel  Center  (AFPC)  (based  on
updates from the MPF) reflected he had one MSM (worth  5  points),  six  Air
Force Commendation Medals (AFCM) (worth 3 points  each),  and  three  AFAM’s
(worth 1 point each).  Based on this data, he was given a  decoration  score
of 25.00 (maximum allowable points), giving him a  score  of  324.59  (above
the  required  score  for  selection  of  323.11).    However,   when   data
verification was accomplished, the MSM was not  reflected  in  ARMS  (master
personnel record),  so  the  promotion  was  placed  on  “withhold”  pending
receipt of the decoration.

DPSOE states AFPC  Enlisted  Promotions  notified  the  applicant’s  MPF  on
several occasions between Nov 08 and Feb 09 of the  discrepancy.   When  the
MSM citation could not be produced, it was removed from the  system  in  Mar
09.  The applicant was reconsidered with the  correct  decorations  and  his
score lowered to 21.00 giving him a  total  score  of  320.59  –  below  the
323.11 required for selection.

DPSOE notes the applicant was not awarded an MSM and should not receive  the
points associated with the medal.  DPSOE states it is  unfortunate  that  an
erroneous update was made to the applicant’s file; however, he was aware  he
had never been presented the award.

DPSOE opines it is the member’s responsibility to  verify  the  accuracy  of
their record before consideration and  selection  for  promotion.   When  an
error is detected, appropriate action must be taken  in  order  to  maintain
the credibility of the  Weighted  Airman  Promotion  System  (WAPS).   DPSOE
notes if a member is selected for promotion based on  erroneous  information
they are reconsidered with the corrected data; and, if the new  total  score
falls below that required for selection, the member’s name is  removed  from
the selection list.  There are over 30,000 individuals tentatively  selected
for promotion annually; and,  of  this  number,  approximately  35  must  be
removed from the selection list because of data errors.

The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the  applicant  on  23
Oct 09, for review and comment within  30  days.   As  of  this  date,  this
office has received no response (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  error  or  injustice.   We  took  notice  of  the  applicant's
complete submission in judging the merits of the  case;  however,  we  agree
with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force  offices  of  primary
responsibility and adopt their rationale as the  basis  for  the  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  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 this application in  Executive
Session on 20 Apr 10, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Panel Chair
      Member
      Member

The following documentary evidence was considered AFBCMR BC-2009-02522:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 16 Jul 09, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSIDR, dated 22 Sep 09.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSOE, dated 8 Oct 09.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Oct 09.




                                   Panel Chair