RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02592
		INDEX CODE:  131.00, 107.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He receive supplemental promotion consideration to the grade of senior master sergeant for cycle 02E8, with inclusion of the Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM) in his records.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Members who review their records and ensure they are current should be allowed the same consideration as members who have their entire records available to the promotion board.  This was not the case in this instance.  The board only saw a decoration was awarded, however, the board had no information available concerning the merit of the award.  Because the award was listed on the promotion brief, HQ AFPC denied the initial request for supplemental consideration.

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.

The applicant’s total promotion score for the 02E8 was 637.71 and the score required for selection in his Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) was 649.44.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPWB states prior to determining what factors would warrant supplemental promotion consideration, several evaluation board members were queried in order to determine what they felt were valid reasons to authorize supplemental promotion consideration.  Based on their recommendations, the reasons outlined in AFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion Program, Table 2.5,    1 July 1999, were developed.  A review of the applicant’s selection folder reflects that the AFAM was included on the Senior NCO Evaluation Brief and reviewed by the evaluation board.  A decoration is not considered missing if the citation or order is filed in the folder or if the decoration was listed on the brief used by the board.  The evaluation board, which convened on     23 January 2002, reviewed his record and assigned the 382.50 board score with full knowledge of the decoration.  Consequently, no further consideration by an evaluation board is either appropriate or authorized.  Therefore, they recommend denial of applicant‘s request.

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 4 October 2002, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant for review and response within 30 days.  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 timely filed.

3.	Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  After reviewing all the evidence, we are not persuaded that approval of the requested relief is warranted.  The applicant argues that the absence of the citation for the AFAM from his selection record caused his record to be inaccurate to a degree requiring supplemental consideration for promotion to senior master sergeant for cycle 02E8.  After reviewing the available record, we disagree.  The applicant’s accomplishments while performing duties in Bosnia, for which he was awarded the AFAM, are discussed in detail in his EPR closing in September 2001.  In view of this fact and because the award was listed on his Senior NCO Evaluation Brief, it is our opinion that the Senior NCO evaluation board had adequate information at their disposal upon which to base a reasonably accurate assessment of the applicant’s promotability in relation to his peers.  Based on the above and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the applicant’s request is not favorably considered.

_________________________________________________________________

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 denied without a personal appearance; and that 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 this application on 19 November 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 8 Aug 02.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 16 Sep 02, w/atchs.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 4 Oct 02.