RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00724
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from
Active Duty, be corrected to reflect award of the Air Force
Commendation Medal (AFCM) (Administratively Corrected).
2. He be given supplemental promotion consideration to the grade
of Technical Sergeant (TSgt).
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He received the AFCM post retirement but it was not reflected on
his DD Form 214. Subsequently, it was added to his DD Form 214.
The AFCM may have been worth enough points to allow for promotion
to the grade of TSgt.
The Board should consider his untimely application in the interest
of justice because the AFCM was awarded after he retired.
In support of his requests, the applicant provides copies of his
DD Forms 214; DD Form 215, Corrections to DD Form 214; AF Form
2224, The AFCM Certificate, special orders and other various
documents associated with his requests.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 22 Jun 11, AFPC/DPSOY notified the applicant his record would
be corrected to reflect award of the AFCM.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial of the applicants request for
supplemental promotion consideration to the grade of TSgt. The
applicant did not meet the Promotion Eligibility Cutoff Date
(PECD) for any cycle prior to his retirement.
While DPSOE was unable to verify the applicants promotion history
files (maintained for a period of 10 years), they were able to
determine that based on his staff sergeant date of rank and
retirement date, he would have been considered for promotion to
the grade of TSgt during cycle 87A6 prior to retiring.
On 31 Oct 86, the applicant retired (closeout date of the AFCM);
therefore, the decoration was not eligible for use in any
promotion process. Air Force policy dictates that before a
decoration is credited for a specific promotion cycle, the
closeout date must be on or before the PECD for the cycle (31 Dec
85 for cycle 87A6).
The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit C.
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
He appreciates all the hard work that went into researching his
case.
The applicants complete submission 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 not timely filed; however, it is in the
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. We took
notice of the applicants complete submission in judging the
merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and
recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility
(OPR) and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our
conclusion that relief beyond that already granted
administratively is not warranted. Therefore, in the absence of
evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to grant the relief
sought in this application.
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-2014-00724 in Executive Session on 15 Jan 15, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Panel Chair
Member
Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Feb 14, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Available Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 4 Apr 14.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 May 14.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, undated.
FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
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-2003-00668
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR notes the squadron commander did not request a change of the closeout date of the decoration until 9 Jul 01, and the applicant applied for supplemental promotion consideration on 27 Aug 01, after the closeout date was changed. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit B. HQ AFPC/DPPPWB asserts there is no conclusive evidence the amended/resubmitted decoration was placed into official...
Therefore it cannot be verified that a request to change the closeout date was, in fact, submitted to the original approval/disapproval authority for determination. ___________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that the closeout date for award of the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) was 1 December 1998, rather than 1 June 1999;...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02908
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 and D. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR recommends disapproval. The applicant has not provided any documentation showing that his request was submitted through administrative channels to the final approval authority for...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05120
Rule 5, Note 2, 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 DECOR 6 must be before the date of selections for the cycle in question. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
Current Air Force promotion policy (AFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion Program, Table 2.2, rule 5 Note 2) dictates that before a decoration is credited for a specific promotion cycle, the closeout date of the decoration must be on or before the promotion eligibility cutoff date (PECD), and the date of the DÉCOR-6, Recommendation for Decoration Printout (RDP), must be before the date of selections for the cycle in question. The Office of Primary Responsibility (OPR) for Air Force...
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 | 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 | CY2014 | BC 2014 01490
Per AFI 36-2502, paragraph 2.8.3.1, a supplemental request based on a missing decoration must have a closeout date on or before the PECD and the commanders recommendation date on the Décor-6 must be before the date AFPC makes the selections for promotion. The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The investigation by his chain of command clearly shows credible evidence that the MSM recommendation was placed into military channels and was...