RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  01-02173
		INDEX CODE: 107.00, 131.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be awarded the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) for the period 16 July 1997 through 2 August 1998.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Receiving a decoration is not automatic upon a permanent change of station (PCS), but his performance during that period was commendable and certainly warrants receiving such an award.  Not only did he exceed many of his peers and superiors, his accomplishments were under abnormal and unexpected conditions.  He believes that not receiving this award was initially based on mismanagement, but when he inquired of the status of the award, management did not seem concerned.  He was given all kinds of reasons why he did not get the decoration.  It has been approximately three years since this injustice occurred and he has tried to resolve this matter on numerous occasions.  He feels the flight’s mismanagement was the main cause of this injustice.  He has made many contributions to the 2nd Supply Squadron and 2nd Bomb Wing.  He has left a lasting impression on the base and local community and is only asking for what he deserves - the AFCM.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a personal statement, a letter from his supervisor, dated 17 March 1999, proposed citation for the AFCM, w/2OLC, and other documentation.

Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air Force in the grade of Master Sergeant.

His EPR profile since 1995 reflects the following:

	PERIOD ENDING	EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL

		31 Mar 95		5
		31 Mar 96		5
		31 Mar 97		5
		 5 Jan 98		5
		30 Jun 98		5
		30 Jun 99		5
		30 Jun 00		5
		30 Jun 01		5

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Chief, Recognition Programs Branch, Promotion, Evaluation and Recognition Division, AFPC/DPPPR, states in part, that the applicant provided a copy of a memorandum from his immediate supervisor at Barksdale AFB (subsequently assigned to Panama) submitted to the 2nd Supply Squadron at Barksdale AFB, as justification for award of the AFCM w/2OLC for the period 16 July 1997 - 2 August 1998, with a proposed citation.  However, no Recommendation for Decoration Printout (RDP-DECOR6) was attached.

Applicant alleges he did not receive an end-of-tour decoration due to “mismanagement,” but did not provide any documentation to substantiate this allegation.  He also states that he was given “all kinds of reasons” why he did not receive an end-of-tour decoration, but did not provide any documentation to substantiate this statement.

Applicant has not provided any documentation showing that a written recommendation was placed into official channels (signed by the recommending official and endorsed by the next higher official in the chain of command), which is usually accomplished on an RDP-DECOR6.  Applicant has not provided a copy of an RDP-DECOR6.

Applicant has not provided any documentation from anyone in the 2nd Supply Squadron chain of command explaining why he was not recommended for, or awarded, an end-of-tour decoration.  Nor has he provided any documentation showing he made an inquiry in writing to his former commander, asking for an explanation.  Although the applicant states he has “tried to resolve the matter on numerous occasions,” he did not provide any documentation to substantiate this statement.  All his efforts seem to have been by telephone or e-mail, with no record of either.  Without documentation showing that a written recommendation was placed into official channels, they can only conclude that the applicant was not recommended for the AFCM w/2OLC for the period 16 July 1997 through 2 August 1998.  Therefore, they recommend denial of the applicant’s request.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

The Chief, Inquiries/BCMR Section, Enlisted Promotion & Military Testing Branch, AFPC/DPPPWB, states that should the applicant be authorized the decoration by the AFBCMR it would not affect the promotion process.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the evaluations and states that the memorandum signed by his supervisor stated that he wrote a decoration prior to his leaving Barksdale AFB, which meant that he had to complete a DÉCOR-6.  In fact, another DÉCOR 6 had to be completed in order to resubmit the citation for the AFCM.  He coordinated with personnel at Barksdale AFB while he was stationed at Kunsan AB, Korea to ensure this was done.  The DÉCOR 6 was sent to his supervisor’s replacement, but he believes it was destroyed once the citation was not resubmitted.  Not having a copy of a DÉCOR 6 should not be a factor in whether or not the AFCM was granted to him.

The appeal process is difficult, people do not like to get involved.  He was not totally surprised that his former commander did not respond to his e-mail; because he did not respond to his e-mail concerning the EPR that was eventually deleted from his records by the AFBCMR.  Yet, keeping a copy of the e-mail only proves that he typed it.  Only a reply from him would prove that he received the e-mail.  Not keeping a copy of an e-mail should not play a role in this decision.  The letter from his supervisor proves that he contacted him, and it also proves that his supervisor contacted his former flight asking that the medal be resubmitted.  He states that his supervisor continues to confirm that he completed the DÉCOR 6, wrote the citation, and submitted the decoration.

His accomplishments during that time period far exceeded his peers and many of his superiors, and this is why the squadron commander selected him for the 2nd Supply Squadron Citizenship Award for 1998.  This award is given for outstanding performance on the job and in the community, as well as, excelling in education and physical fitness.  The Commander stated he was the epitome of the whole-person concept, and chose him number one out of over 420 personnel.  It would be contradictory to say he is the top all around performer, yet he does not deserve a medal upon his departure.  He truly believes upper management somehow missed the suspense, then tried to cover their tracks.  His performance and accomplishments proves he was worthy of the AFCM.

Applicant’s complete response, with attachment, is attached at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.	The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.

2.	The application was timely filed.

3.	Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice warranting partial relief.  We took particular note of the statement from the applicant's supervisor who indicated that the applicant is truly deserving of this recognition - award of the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM).  He [the supervisor] PCS’d a month after the applicant and he was not aware the AFCM was downgraded and the applicant was not recognized for his contributions.  The supervisor states that the applicant’s overall exceptional performance led to success of the Aircraft Parts Store and the 2nd Bomb Wing; his off-duty contributions made the 2nd Supply Squadron a better place to live and work; and his ability to strive for perfection, always going above and beyond expectations, led to his many accomplishments.  He deserves the recognition compatible with his performance.  We therefore, believe the evidence presented raises sufficient doubt regarding award of the AFCM for the period 16 July 1997 through 2 August 1998, and that such doubt should be resolved in the applicant’s favor.  In view of the foregoing, and in an effort to offset any possibility of an injustice, we believe the applicant should be awarded the Air Force Commendation Medal, 2OLC, for the period 16 July 1997 through 2 August 1998 for meritorious service.

_________________________________________________________________

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 the Air Force Commendation Medal, Second Oak Leaf Cluster, for meritorious service, for the period 16 July 1997 through 2 August 1998.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 18 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 6 Jul 01, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 15 Aug 01.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 20 Aug 01, w/atch.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 31 Aug 01.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 22 Sep 01, w/atch.

			

AFBCMR 01-02173

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, be corrected to show that he was awarded the Air Force Commendation Medal, Second Oak Leaf Cluster, for meritorious service, for the period 16 July 1997 through 2 August 1998.