RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00918
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. He be awarded the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM),
Second Oak Leaf Cluster (2OLC).
2. If AFCM 2OLC is approved he requests it be used in the
promotion process to the grade of Master Sergeant (MSgt) for all
appropriate cycles.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was awarded the AFCM, 2OLC; however, after his permanent
change of station to another base, a flood destroyed many of the
records. Had the decoration been used in the promotion process
it would have given him the points needed to be promoted to the
grade of MSgt. It has negatively affected his life and he wants
his just due as a retiree.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 5 Nov 71, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force.
On 7 Dec 87 he received a Letter of Commendation from his
commander congratulating him for his selection as an Outstanding
Performer.
On 1 Dec 91, the applicant retired in the grade of technical
sergeant.
According to the Air Force Personnel Services website, the AFCM
was authorized by the Secretary of the Air Force on 28 Mar 58,
for award to members of the Armed Forces of the United States
who, while serving in any capacity with the Air Force after 24
Mar 58, shall have distinguished themselves by meritorious
achievement and service. The degree of merit must be
distinctive, though it need not be unique. Acts of courage which
do not involve the voluntary risk of life required for the
Soldier's Medal (or the Airman's Medal now authorized for the
Air Force) may be considered for the AFCM.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSID recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of
an error or an injustice. A Special Order is the official
source documentation for verification of an authorized
decoration. The applicant was awarded the AFCM with 1OLC with
inclusive dates 25 Mar 83-20 May 87. A Special Order or any
other documentation verifying recommendation or award for the
AFCM w/2OLC was not found in his military personnel records. He
provides a copy of the Letter of Commendation dated 7 Dec
87 stating his selection as an outstanding performer. The
Letter of Commendation and/or the Outstanding Performer award do
not equate to an award of the AFCM. However, he should have
been awarded the Korean Defense Service Medal (KDSM) for his
service from 5 Nov 71-30 Nov 91. His records will be
administratively corrected upon final Board decision.
The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial indicating he would not have been
promoted based on the lack of required points to make promotion.
He was considered and non-selected for promotion to the grade of
MSgt three (3) times before retiring 30 Nov 91. For cycle 90A7,
he received a total score of 300.83; required score for
selection in his Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) was 344.91.
For cycle 91A7, his total score was 322.73; required score for
selection in his AFSC was 345.48. For cycle 92A7, his total
score was 349.06; required score for selection in his AFSC was
355.89. The contested AFCM (worth three points) would not have
rendered him a select for any cycle.
The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit D.
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluation(s) were forwarded to the
applicant on 25 Aug 14 for review and comment within 30 days
(Exhibit E). As of this date, no response has been received by
this office.
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 offices of primary
responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our
conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of
injustice. Therefore, aside from the administrative correction
to award the KDSM, we find no basis to recommend granting the
requested relief.
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 documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2014-00918 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 Feb 14, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSID, dated 7 Jul 14.
Exhibit D. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 6 Aug 14.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Aug 14.
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 | 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 | 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 03077
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03077 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be considered for supplemental promotion to the grade of Master Sergeant (MSgt) by the Cycle 95E7 promotion board. The applicant's request for supplemental promotion consideration for cycle 95E7 was denied by AFPC/DPPPW (Enlisted Promotions) on 21 Aug 95 due to noncompliance with AF policy (AFI 36-2502,...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02889
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial indicating the applicant has provided no supporting documentation or conclusive evidence that the decoration was in official channels prior to selections for promotion cycle 12E5. In accordance with...
A complete copy of the Air Force Evaluation is at Exhibit C. The Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, also reviewed this application and indicated that the applicant stated the wrong cycle and he actually means the 93A5 cycle, which he missed selection by less than 3 points. Current Air Force promotion policy 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...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The applicant is requesting award of the Air Force “Accommendation Award” (Air Force Commendation Medal) for the period of 196 1 - 1964 and 197 1 - 1973. The applicant has provided a score notice for the 72A7 promotion cycle (promotions for this cycle was normally exceeding Aug 71 - Jan 72 but were carried over to Jul 72) reflecting...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02341
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIT recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an injustice. When a copy of the decorations were received, it was discovered that the close out date for one of his AFCMs was 2 Apr 12, which is after the...
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 | CY2006 | BC-2005-03331
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-03331 INDEX CODE: 111.02 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 30 June 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be considered for supplemental promotion consideration to the grade of senior master sergeant (SMSgt) for promotion cycles 03E8 and 04E8. DPPPWB...