RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  01-00272
		INDEX NUMBER:  131.00; 107.00

	XXXXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  None

	XXX-XX-XXXX	HEARING DESIRED:  No

_______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Recommendation for Decoration Printout (RDP) for the Meritorious Service Medal, First Oak Leaf Cluster, awarded to him for the period 22 September 1995 to 24 June 1999 be corrected by backdating it to 25 January 1999 and that the decoration be considered during the 00E8 promotion cycle.

He be awarded Control Air Force Specialty Code (CAFSC) 9D000, Dormitory Manager, effective 4 January 1999.

He be provided supplemental promotion consideration to senior master sergeant (SMSgt) (E-8) for the 00E8 cycle with the corrected record.

_______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was selected by the 375th Civil Engineering Squadron (375 CES/CC) Commander in Nov 98 to fill the position of Dormitory Manager, CAFSC 9D000, and was released from his assigned unit on 4 Jan 99 and started duty as Dormitory Manager the same day.  He became aware in Sep 99 that he had not been formally awarded CAFSC 9D000 and through his chain of command attempted to get the problem fixed.  He was not awarded the CAFSC until 31 Jul 00, nineteen months later, although he had been performing the duty.

When he transferred from his assigned unit in Jan 99, his losing commander submitted a recommendation to award him the Meritorious Service Medal (1OLC).  The approval authority decided that the recommendation should be held and resubmitted in conjunction with his next enlisted performance report (EPR) that ended up closing out on 24 Jun 99 when his supervisor/commander retired.  Due to his commander’s retirement, his decoration package got overlooked.  His new supervisor eventually got the decoration processed with the dates backdated, but the RDP was not changed.

In support of his request, the applicant provides letters of support from his chain of command and various correspondence related to the issues being considered.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_______________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is presently serving on active duty in the grade of master sergeant.  His Total Active Federal Military Service Date is 21 Jan 82.

A profile of his last ten EPRs follows:

	  Closeout Date				Overall Rating

	    22 Feb 91					5
	    31 Aug 91					5
	    31 Aug 92					5
	    31 Aug 93					5
	    15 Apr 94					5
	    15 Apr 95					5
	    31 Aug 95					5
	    31 Aug 96					4
	    31 Aug 97					5
	    31 Aug 98					5
	    24 Jun 99					5
	    24 Jun 00					5

The applicant was considered for promotion to SMSgt during promotion cycle 00E8 in AFSC 3P071 (Security) and not selected.  The total score he needed for selection was 651.51.  His total score was 578.19, a difference of 73.32 points.

_______________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Chief, Air Force Enlisted Civil Engineer Assignments, AFPC/DPAAD1, evaluated this application in regards to the applicant’s request for backdating of the award of CAFSC 9D000.  She recommends that the applicant’s request be denied.

As the AFPC approval authority for Dormitory Management, 9D000, her records indicate that the applicant was not approved to perform duties as a 9D000 until Jul 00.  Additionally, after review of the applicant’s request and supporting documents (e-mails), she could not find any information to support the applicant’s allegations.  To the contrary, she discovered that his requests, as far back as Oct 99, were consistently disapproved because manning did not support it.  All 9D000 positions were filled.  When a position became available in Jul 00, the MPF and MAJCOM recommended approval and she then approved the applicant to fill the position.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on     6 Jul 01 for review and comment within 30 days.  To date, a response has not been received.

_______________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, AFPC/DPPPWB, evaluated this application in regards to the applicant’s request to have his MSM (1OLC) considered for the 00E8 promotion cycle and recommends denial.

Current Air Force promotion policy dictates that before a decoration is credited for a specific promotion cycle, the closeout date 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.  Each promotion cycle has an established PECD that is used to determine what AFSC, EPRs, and decorations will be considered during the promotion cycle.  The PECD for the 00E8 cycle was 30 Sep 99.

The applicant’s MSM (1OLC) does not meet the criteria for promotion credit during the 00E8 cycle because it was not placed into official channels (date the commander signed the RDP) until 21 Jun 00, after selections were made on 3 Mar 00.  The date of the RDP is 7 Jun 00.  Documentation in the applicant’s case file indicates that his Wing Commander had reservations when the decoration was initially submitted on   25 Jan 99 due to a “4” EPR the applicant had received.  The Wing Commander decided that the recommendation should be held until the next EPR closed out and to make the decoration for an extended tour, not for a permanent change of assignment, if the applicant did a good job.

After an extensive review of the circumstances of this case, there is no conclusive evidence the decoration was submitted and processed before selections were made for the 00E8 cycle.  The applicant’s request to have the decoration included in the promotion process for cycle 00E8 as an exception to policy was disapproved on 13 Aug 01 by the Promotion Management Section.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit E.

The Chief, Recognition Programs Branch, AFPC/DPPPR, evaluated this application in regards to the applicant’s request to change the date of the RDP and recommends denial.

When the applicant initially submitted his request for consideration by the AFBCMR, it was returned for him to work his request through administrative channels.  He had not provided any documentation showing that he had worked his request through administrative channels and failed to provide additional documentation as requested.

When the applicant did not respond, his application was processed, however, in the meantime, the applicant had applied to AFPC requesting supplemental promotion consideration and providing a copy of the first RDP, dated 22 Jan 99.  After AFPC/DPPPR obtained a copy, and sent it to the applicant on 14 Jun 01 advising him to take the RDP to his Military Personnel Flight to have his record corrected.  The applicant again failed to take the proper action.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit F.

_______________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the additional evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 31 Aug 01 for review and comment within 30 days.  To date, a response has not been received.

_______________________________________________________________

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 probable error or injustice in regards to the applicant’s request to backdate the RDP for the Meritorious Service Medal (1OLC), awarded to him for the period 22 September 1995 to January 1999 and that it be considered during the 00E8 promotion cycle.  We took notice of the applicant's 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 and adopt their rationale as the basis for our 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 compelling basis to recommend changing the date of the RDP in question.

3.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice in regards to the applicant’s request that he be awarded Control Air Force Specialty Code 9D000 effective 4 Jan 99.  The Board observes that although it was not officially approved until Jul 00 for the applicant to fill a 9D000 position, he in fact was reassigned to a new unit and performed duties as a 9D000 starting on 4 Jan 99.  This is verified by the fact that he had two Enlisted Performance Reports rendered on him as a 9D000 that closed out prior to Jul 00.  While it does appear that the applicant was improperly reassigned, the Board believes that the fault lies with the applicant’s chain of command.  To deny the applicant credit for service that has already been performed and that was sanctioned by his chain of command would constitute an injustice.  Therefore, the Board recommends that the applicant’s records be corrected as indicated below.

_______________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that he was awarded Control Air Force Specialty Code (CAFSC) 9D000, Dormitory Manager, effective 4 January 1999.

It is further recommended that he be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of senior master sergeant (E-8) beginning with the 00E8 cycle.

If AFPC discovers any adverse factors during or subsequent to supplemental consideration that are separate and apart, and unrelated to the issues involved in this application, that would have rendered the applicant ineligible for promotion, such information will be documented and presented to the Board for a final determination on the individual’s qualifications for the promotion.

If supplemental promotion consideration results in the selection for promotion to the higher grade, immediately after such promotion, the records shall be corrected to show that he was promoted to the higher grade on the date of rank established by the supplemental promotion and that he is entitled to all pay, allowances, and benefits of such grade as of that date.

_______________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 9 October 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

All members voted to correct the records, as recommended.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Jan 01, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPAAD1, dated 27 Jun 01,
                w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 6 Jul 01.
    Exhibit E.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 13 Aug 01,
                W/atchs.
    Exhibit F.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 17 Aug 01,
                W/atchs.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 31 Aug 01.

                                   
                                   Panel Chair

AFBCMR 01-00272

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

	Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

	The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to XXXXXXXXXX, XXX-XX-XXXX, be corrected to show that he was awarded Control Air Force Specialty Code (CAFSC) 9D000, Dormitory Manager, effective 4 January 1999.

	It is further directed that he be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of senior master sergeant (E-8) beginning with the 00E8 cycle.

	If AFPC discovers any adverse factors during or subsequent to supplemental consideration that are separate and apart, and unrelated to the issues involved in this application, that would have rendered the applicant ineligible for promotion, such information will be documented and presented to the Board for a final determination on the individual’s qualifications for the promotion.

	If supplemental promotion consideration results in the selection for promotion to the higher grade, immediately after such promotion, the records shall be corrected to show that he was promoted to the higher grade on the date of rank established by the supplemental promotion and that he is entitled to all pay, allowances, and benefits of such grade as of that date.

Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency