RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04634
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Joint Service Commendation Medal (JSCM) dated 6 December
2010 be included in his records for promotion cycle 11E7.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His JSCM dated December 2010, which was before the promotion
cutoff, was not updated in his records. He has submitted copies
of his awards to the Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC), however,
his records have not been updated. This omission may cause him
to lose his line number to master sergeant. At the time of this
request, he was deployed to Afghanistan and has been unable to
resolve this matter through the personnel system at his deployed
location or at his home station.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of his
presented awards.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently on active duty serving in the grade
of technical sergeant.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are
contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of
the Air Force, which are at Exhibits B and C.
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial. The applicant was considered and
tentatively selected for promotion to master sergeant during
promotion cycle 11E7. During the verification process, his Air
Force Commendation Medal (AFCM), third Oak Leaf Cluster, was
noted as missing from his records. He was notified of the
discrepancy and his promotion was placed on hold pending receipt
of the decoration.
The applicant submitted a copy of all of his awards. Upon
reviewing his records, it was noted two of his AFCMs had been
amended. Rather than having 7 AFCMs worth 21 points, he
actually had 5 AFCMs worth 15 points. After correcting his
records to reflect the JSCM and removing the two erroneously
updated AFCMs, the applicant was considered and non-selected
for the January 2012 supplemental promotion process. He fell
three points short of the cutoff score required for promotion
selection.
The completed DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit B.
AFPC/DPSIDR does not make a recommendation. On 20 December
2011, the applicants master personnel record was updated as
follows:
2 Joint Service Commendation Medals
1 Joint Service Achievement Medal
1 Air Force Achievement Medal
5 Air Force Commendation Medals
This information is provided to show the correction to the
applicants records.
The complete DPSIDR evaluation is at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the
applicant on 10 February 2012, for review and comment within
30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, this office has received
no response.
________________________________________________________________
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. We took
notice of the applicant's complete submission and the available
evidence of record in judging the merits of the case. Although
we note there was an error with the applicants decorations,
AFPC/DPSOE has corrected the applicants decoration history and
provided him supplemental promotion consideration. We are in
agreement with their actions and believe the applicant has been
provided appropriate relief. Therefore, no further action by
this Board is warranted.
________________________________________________________________
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 BCMR Docket Number
BC-2011-04634 in Executive Session on 7 June 2012, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 11 Nov 11, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 12 Jan 12.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIDR, dated 31 Jan 12.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Feb 12.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 04000
He states Air Force members do not receive the RDP when the award is presented. The applicant was considered and not selected for promotion to master sergeant during the 14E7 promotion cycle. Because the applicant did not take corrective action to ensure his decoration was properly updated in his record until four years after it was awarded and after he became aware he missed promotion by less than three points, it is recommend denying his request to use the AFCM in the promotion process...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-02522
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03240
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are included at Exhibits C, D, and E. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIDR recommends granting relief to change the RDP date and Given Under Hand date of the applicants 14 Nov 13 AFCM, indicating there is evidence of an error or injustice. It is recommended the Board grant the applicants request and determine an appropriate RDP...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04076
She was notified by the Base Records Office that the basic AFAM was missing from her personnel records and she needed to provide a copy or her records would be changed to reflect the assumed discrepancy. The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 1 Apr 11, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). ...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02893
Prior to submitting his request to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFCMR), he submitted a supplemental promotion consideration package to the Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC) promotions section requesting that both decorations be considered. He spoke with the Base Level Awards and Decoration Element, researched the Air Education and Training Command policy and AFI 36-2803, The Air Force Military Awards and Decorations Program, and found the Décor-6 reflects when it...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02046
Current Air Force promotion policy (AFI 36-2502) 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 Promotion Eligibility Cutoff Date (PECD), and the date of the DÉCOR-6, Request for Decoration Printout (RDP), or in this case the AF Form 3994, must be before the date of selections for the cycle in question. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01346
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01346 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her records be rescored for promotion to master sergeant (Cycle 13E7) with the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM), dated 18 February 2010. The first time the decoration would have been used in the promotion process was cycle 12E7 to master sergeant. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the...
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation, with attachment, is attached at Exhibit C. The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, AFPC/DPPPWB, also reviewed this application and indicated that the last promotion cycle the applicant was eligible for consideration to the grade of technical sergeant prior to his retirement date was 93A6 with promotions effective 1 Aug 92 – 1 Jul 93. Current Air Force promotion policy (AFI 36-2502, Table 2.2, Rule 5, Note 2), the directive in effect at the time,...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00938
The Air Force should have made the decision of changing this policy to be effective for future recruiting goals in the recruiting career field and provided a definitive date of implementation rather than affecting personnel currently serving in that duty. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case and do not find that it supports a determination that he be awarded two WAPS points for his Air Force Recruiting ribbon. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04722
She requested supplemental consideration for selection to E-6, but her request was denied and she was told to file a claim with the Air Force Board of Corrections of Military Records. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force, which are attached at Exhibits C and D. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial, indicating...