RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00400
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The close out date on his Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) be
corrected from 10 May 10 to 1 Apr 10 to align with the arrival at
his new duty station.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His arrival date at his new duty station is 1 Apr 10 and the 10
May 10 close out date overlaps with his new assignment and should
close out when he left his previous assignment.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant currently serves in the Regular Air Force in the
grade of E-6.
On 9 Dec 10, the applicant was awarded the AFCM for meritorious
service for the period 1 Aug 05 through 10 May 10.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are
described in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of
primary responsibility (OPR), which is included at Exhibit C.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSID recommends relief be granted indicating that in
accordance with AFI 36-2803, Air Force Military Awards and
Decorations Program, the closeout for a decoration being awarded
under the condition of Permanent Change of Station is the date of
final out processing [from the duty station]. While the applicant
has presented no documentation in support of his claim or
demonstrating that he has exhausted his administrative avenues of
relief by requesting relief from the award approval authority, the
closeout date of his AFCM should be changed from 10 May 10 to 31
Mar 10. According to the Military Personnel Data System, the
applicant in-processed at his current duty station on 1 Apr 10;
therefore, it appears the applicant's decoration close out date
should be 31 Mar 10.
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSID 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 28 Jul 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).
As of this date, no response has been received by this office.
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has not 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. In this respect,
we note this Board is the highest administrative level of appeal
within the Air Force. As such, an applicant must first exhaust
all available avenues of administrative relief provided by
existing law or regulations prior to seeking relief before this
Board, as required by the governing Air Force Instruction. The
Air Force office of primary responsibility has reviewed this
application and indicated there is an available avenue of
administrative relief the applicant has not first pursued. In
this respect, the applicant should pursue relief from the award
approval authority. In view of this, we find this application is
not ripe for adjudication at this level, as there exists a
subordinate level of appeal that has not first been depleted.
Therefore, in view of the above, we find no basis to recommend
granting the relief sought in this application.
4. The applicants case is adequately documented and it has not
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will
materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of material 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-2014-00400 in Executive Session on 2 Dec 14 under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 24 Jan 14, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSID, dated 1 Apr 14.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Jul 14, w/atchs.
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 9 5 - 0 2 7 0 1 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO 2-5’1997 APPLICANT REOUESTS THAT: The closeout date of the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) be changed from 4 Apr 95 to an unspecified date in Mar 95,. and that the AFCM be considered in the promotion process for cycle 9535 for promotion to the grade of staff sergeant. closeout date of the AFCM should have been in Mar 95. Current Air...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02871
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02871 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 18 March 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The inclusive dates of his Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) and Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) be changed. _________________________________________________________________ AIR...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02326
Current Air Force promotion policy, AFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion Program, Table 2.2, Rule 5, Note 2, {sic – should be Rule 7} 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 the date of the DÉCOR-6, Request for Decoration Printout (RDP), must be before the date of selections for the cycle in question. Although the Board is sympathetic to the applicant’s near-miss for promotion, evidence...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 03234
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03234 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM). Although the applicants APR, closing 29 May 73, confirms that he was recommended for the AFCM, the applicants records and the documentation he has provided in support of his appeal, do not...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05166
(Will be administratively corrected) ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: There was insufficient data at the time his DD Form 214 was prepared. Should the applicant provide the additional documentation requested by AFCENT, he can then be considered for award of the PH. Therefore, aside from the administrative corrections to award the AFCM and the AFCAM, we find no basis upon which to recommend granting the additional relief sought...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04551
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04551 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Referral Enlisted Performance Report (EPR), rendered for the period of 21 Jun 12 through 20 Jun 13, be voided or removed from his military personnel records. In accordance with AFI 36-2406, Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Systems, chapter 10, paragraph 10.1.1: The Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB) was...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01902
b. AFPC/DPSIDs advisory opinion states The applicant believes that after subtraction of his TDY to the NCO Academy and the time he was loaned out to another section, the rater on the contested evaluation did not obtain the minimum required supervision of 120 days. In his original application, there is substantial evidence that shows the Chief did not have enough days of supervision to close out a report on him. The Chief sent an email to him on 21 Sep 09 stating he was assigned as his...
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 | CY2013 | bc-2011-00217
In support of his request, he provides two personal memoranda, dated 22 Mar 10 and 11 Feb 12; letters of support from his Commander during the specified tour of duty, dated 20 Jan 10 and 25 Jan 12; letter of support from the Squadron’s Operations Officer, dated 5 Oct 10; Evaluation Reports and Appeals Board (ERAB) decision to rescind the EPR (case#2812143), dated 30 Nov 10; second request for AFCM, 1 OLC re-instatement, dated 11 Feb 12; and justification memorandum from the...