RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-02750
		INDEX CODE:  131.00
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) rendered for the period 3 Mar 97 through 1 Aug 00 be included in the 01E6 promotion cycle selection process.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

In August 2000, his supervisor informed him that he would be recommending him for an extended tour AFCM.  Upon his supervisor's return from a deployment in December 2000, he finished writing the decoration and attempted to order a Recommendation for Decoration Printout (RDP).  It is common practice to hold off on ordering the RDP for extended tour medals until the decoration has already been completed.  On 10 Jan 01, the RDP was ordered and the inclusive dates of March 1997 through March 2001 were incorrectly entered.  In February 2001, he contacted the Military Personnel Flight (MPF) to ensure the AFCM was reflected in his records and he was assured that it was.  He never received a promotion Data Verification Record (DVR) with the AFCM and was told by MPF personnel that it was because of the conversion from PC-III to MilPDS.  In June 2001, he received his promotion test results and discovered he had missed the cutoff by 2.37 points.  He then realized that an Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM) that he was previously awarded, and the AFCM were not on the score sheet.  The AFAM error was easily corrected but he was told that the AFCM had a closeout date beyond the promotion eligibility cutoff date (PECD) and was not eligible for consideration in the 01E6 cycle.  He advised his supervisor of the problem and actions were initiated to correct the error and change the closeout date.  The closeout date on the AFCM was in March 2001, 7 months after the last accomplishment mentioned in the AFCM.  Upon confirmation, the wing commander approved the change and amendments were made to correct the orders, the citation, and MilPDS.  In October 2001, he received word that he had a line number for promotion to technical sergeant.  However, in March 2002, he noticed that his line number was no longer reflected and he contacted the MPF to find out why.  He was told that a message dated 26 Dec 01 indicated that his medal was classified as a resubmitted medal and that the order date of 10 Sep 01 did not meet the promotion criteria outlined in AFI 36-2502.

The supplemental promotion board classifies the medal as a resubmitted medal; however, the AFCM was never resubmitted and therefore, it does not fall into the criteria of AFI 36-2502, Promotions, Table 2.2, note 2, which defines a resubmitted medal.  The supplemental board states that the medal must have been placed into official channels prior to the date selections were made.  The AFCM was placed into official channels on 10 Jan 01 and selections were made on 29 May 01.  The supplemental board cites that the special order date must be prior to the date selections were made.  The inclusive date of the AFCM is March 1997 to August 2000, in accordance with AFI 36-2803, The Air Force Awards and Decorations Program, paragraph 3.4.2., the effective date of all decorations is the closing date of the service period recognized regardless of the order date.  The supplemental board states that the citation itself, as well as the order were amended.  Only the inclusive dates were amended, no verbiage in the citation was changed or amended.  Different command authority signature constitutes a change of command, not a resubmitted decoration.  The AFCM meets the criteria for inclusion in the 01E6 selection process and three points must be recalculated into the 01E6 cycle.

In support of his request, applicant provided a personal statement, documentation associated with the AFCM, his 01E6 score notice, documentation associated with his request for supplemental promotion consideration, an extract from AFI 36-2502 and AFI 36-2803.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 30 Jan 92.  He has been progressively promoted to the grade of staff sergeant, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 1 Jul 98.  

The RDP printout was requested on 8 Jan 01 and signed by the applicant's commander and placed in official channels on 10 Jan 01.  The order was published on 25 Jan 01 and the certificate/citation was signed on 2 Feb 01.  On 10 Sep 01, the order was published amending the closeout date to 1 Aug 00.  

His total promotion score for the 01E6 cycle was 310.10 and the score required for selection in his Air Force specialty was 311.47.  If the decoration were counted in his total score, he would become a selectee.  Promotion selections for this cycle were made on 29 May 01 with a public release date of 7 Jun 01.  

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPR reviewed applicant's request and states that the decoration was submitted into official channels and awarded within the time constraints required by AFI 36-2803.  When the applicant found he missed promotion to E-6 in June 2001, he contacted the MPF and was informed that the closeout date (March 2001) was after the PECD (31 Dec 00).  He then used administrative channels to have the closeout date changed to 1 Aug 00, so that the closeout date would be prior to the PECD and the AFCM could be used for supplemental promotion consideration.  There are no technical errors or injustices regarding the applicant's AFCM.  The DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit B.

AFPC/DPPPWB reviewed applicant's request and recommends denial.  DPPPWB states that 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 PECD, and the date of the RDP, must be before the date of selections for the cycle in question.  Each promotion cycle has an established PECD which is used to determine what Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) the member will be considered for promotion in, as well as which performance reports and decorations will be used in the promotion consideration.  The PECD for cycle 01E6 was 31 Dec 00.  In addition, a decoration that a member claims was lost, downgraded, etc., must be fully documented and verified that it was placed into official channels prior to the selection date. This policy was initiated to specifically preclude personnel from subsequently (after promotion selections) submitting someone for a decoration with a retroactive decoration effective date (close out) so as to put them over the selection cutoff score.  Exceptions to the above policy are only considered when the airman can support a previous submission with documentation or statements including conclusive evidence that the recommendation was officially placed in military channels within the prescribed time limit and conclusive evidence the recommendation was not acted upon through loss or inadvertence.  

The decoration does not meet the criteria for credit during the 01E6 process because it closed out after the PECD.  The decoration was later amended to change the closeout date to 1 Aug 00.  This amended decoration does not meet the criteria for promotion credit during the 01E6 cycle because it was not amended until 10 Sep 01, well after selections were made and he discovered he missed promotion by 1.37 points.  His request to have the decoration included in the 01E6 promotion process as an "exception to policy" was disapproved by AFPC/DPPPWM in December 2001.  DPPPWB concurs with that decision.  The DPPPWB evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant states that the AFCM was initiated well prior to the PECD.  His performances warranting the award of the AFCM were accomplished prior to the PECD.  Yet, he is being told it would be unfair to award the three points earned for those accomplishments in that same time frame.  His squadron, group, and wing commander readdressed the dates of the medal and found it to be clear that the incorrect dates had been placed on the original citation.  The credible evidence is reflected in the citation itself in that the achievements cited for award of the medal were well prior to the PECD.  It is not plausible to believe that a supervisor would write an AFCM and tell the individual that the award would be counted toward promotion criteria and decide to purposefully place the incorrect dates on the citation in order for the decoration to be disallowed.  This is obviously not what was intended as supported by documentation previously provided.  This is not the instance where an individual is trying to push an after-the-fact decoration in order to earn points to exceed the cutoff.  His decoration was placed into official channels as of 10 Jan 01.  For an individual to actually try to submit a decoration after the date selections were made would produce an RDP reflecting a date after the PECD.  His 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 timely filed.

3.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  In this respect, the RDP for the original AFCM was prepared on 8 Jan 01.  The inclusive dates of the original AFCM were from 3 Mar 97 through 2 Mar 01.  On 25 Jan 01, orders were prepared awarding the original AFCM and the decoration was signed on 2 Feb 01.  Thus it appears that he was awarded the AFCM for meritorious service during a period that had not yet occurred.  It is our opinion that credible evidence has been provided in support of his appeal which would lead us to believe that because of an administrative error, the close-out date of the AFCM was incorrectly annotated on the RDP as 2 Mar 01.  Given the unequivocal support from the senior officers involved, and having no basis to question their integrity, it is our opinion that the benefit of doubt in this matter should be resolved in favor of the applicant.  Therefore, we recommend that his records be corrected to the extent 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 the Recommendation for Decoration Printout, for the award of the Air Force Commendation Medal, covering the period 3 March 1997 through 1 August 2000, was signed by the commander on 10 January 2001. 

It is further recommended that he be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of technical sergeant for all appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 01E6.

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 the 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 Docket Number 02-02750 in Executive Session on 4 Dec 02, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

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

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 21 Aug 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC.DPPPR, dated 16 Sep 02.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 16 Sep 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Oct 02.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 16 Oct 02, w/atchs.

						

AFBCMR 02-02750

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 APPLICANT, be corrected to show that the Recommendation for Decoration Printout, for the award of the Air Force Commendation Medal, covering the period 3 March 1997 through 1 August 2000, was signed by the commander on 10 Jan 2001. 

	It is further directed that he be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of technical sergeant for all appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 01E6.

	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 the 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.