RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-00372
		
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM), First Oak Leaf Cluster (1OLC) for the period 22 November 1988 - 14 November 1989, be considered for all cycles from 1990 for promotions to staff and technical sergeant.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Upon his permanent change of station from Kunsan Air Base, Republic of Korea, in November 1989, an Air Force Achievement Medal was submitted by his squadron commander, Richard Loewenhagen.  Upon his arrival at his next duty station, Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, AZ, the Consolidated Base Personnel Office (CBPO) had not yet received this award in from Korea.  Within a year of his arrival in Arizona, he deployed in Support of Operation DESERT SHIELD/STORM.  After his arrival back from this operation, he inquired again, approximately 1 April 1991, as to the whereabouts of this medal.  Again, the CBPO had not received it.  At that time, he considered this submission lost and contacted his previous squadron commander.  They reaccomplished the decoration package and resubmitted it to the 8th Tactical Fighter Wing at Kunsan Air Base.  After giving the submission, adequate time for processing and another permanent change of station to Antigua Air Station, West Indies, he inquired on its whereabouts on approximately 1 August 1992.  Again, his servicing CBPO had no information on its overseas location to Lt Col XXXXX’s stateside place of assignment in order to reaccomplish yet another package for submission.  The decoration package was resubmitted with his approval to the 8th Tactical Fighter Wing, Kunsan Air Base, this being the third submission in less than three years.  After four years and two further permanent changes of stations, a fourth resubmission (photo copy of third submission) was made to Kunsan Air Base.  This fourth submission was made while he was stationed at Osan Air Base, Republic of Korea, after a personal conversation with Col XXXXX, then the commander and decoration approval official 8th Fighter Wing, Kunsan Air Base.  Once again, this decoration submission disappeared with no record of receipt by Kunsan personnel.  Due to continuous frustration, his inability to get information on these submissions, need to concentrate on family and overwhelming requirements as an Air Force Recruiter and two more permanent changes of station, the package was not resubmitted until he contacted Lt Col XXXXX, Vice Commander, Pacific Air Forces, on 29 October 2002.  At his advice, he resubmitted the package directly to the 8th Military Personnel Flight, Kunsan Air Base, after he contacted them inquiring on his behalf.  This submission, the fifth in thirteen years, was subsequently approved by base officials and entered in to his personnel records.  It is obvious that it took a general officer to correct this discrepancy and drive this to completion and not due to complacency on his part.  He followed proper guidelines, chain of command, and adhered to advice from base personnel agencies who told him that he could take some time to get his decoration approved due to huge backlogs at most 12 month tour locations.  His achievements during the inclusive date merit the award of the Air Force Achievement Medal as stated by his commander during that time.

In support of his request applicant provided copies of email communication, original AFAM orders and citation and a copy of AFI 36-2603, Air Force Board for Corrections of Military Records, letter form 12 AF/IGI, signed décor-6 and copy of EPR dated 1 Oct 89.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

An AFAM is worth one weighted promotion point.  The one point this decoration is worth would not have made the applicant a selectee to staff sergeant during cycles 90A5 and 93B5.  He was selected from promotion to staff sergeant during 94A5.  The one point this decoration is worth would not have made him a selectee to technical sergeant during cycles 96E6 and 99E6 as his total promotion score was more than 1 point lower than the score required for selection.  He was selected for promotion to technical sergeant during cycle 00E6.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPWB recommended denial stated that there are two separate and distinct policies.  Current Air Force policy (AFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion Program, Table 2.2, Rule 5, Note 2), dictates that for credit of the decoration in the promotion cycle the closeout date of the decoration must be on or before the promotion eligibility cut-off date (PECD) and the date of the DÉCOR-6, Request for Decoration Printout (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) or Chief Enlisted Manager (CEM) Code the member will be considered, as well as which performance reports and decorations will be used in the promotion consideration.  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 decoration does not meet the criteria for promotion credit for any cycle prior to 97E6 because the DÉCOR-6 was signed by the commander placing the Recommendation for Decoration into official channels on 27 July 1996, after selections were made and announced for previous cycles.  It would serve no useful purpose to grant the applicant’s request to have the decoration considered in the promotion process for past cycles as he would not become a selectee for staff sergeant any earlier than 1 January 1994 or technical sergeant any earlier than 1 January 2001
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 7 March 2003 for review and response within 30 days.  As of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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 an error or injustice.  After reviewing the documentation provided, we are convinced that the AFAM should have been considered in the selection process for the previous promotion cycles of 90A5-93B5 for SSgt and 96E6-99E6 for TSgt.  Documents provided indicate that the decoration was initially submitted for approval in November 1989.  It appears that through no fault of his own, the decoration was lost.  In addition, it is a well-known fact that the high mission-oriented nature of deployments and high personnel turnover rates at overseas locations has historically had a significant impact on the timeliness of decoration processing.  The documentation provided substantiates to our satisfaction that similar circumstances were involved in the processing of the applicant’s AFAM.  Accordingly, we recommend that his records be corrected to the extent indicated below.  We note that the Air Force has determined that inclusion of the AFAM will not result in changes to his selection status for promotion cycles to the grades of staff and technical sergeant.  However, inasmuch as the applicant contends that the inclusion of the AFAM would make a difference in his selection to the grade of staff and technical sergeant in order to resolve any injustice to the applicant we recommend the applicants record be corrected as indicated.

_________________________________________________________________

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 (RDP) (Décor-6), for the award of the Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM), First Oak Leaf Cluster (1OLC), covering the period 22 November 1988 through    14 November 1989, was signed by the commander on 15 November 1989, rather than 15 October 2002.

It is further directed that he be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of staff sergeant (E-5) for the 90A5 through 93B5 cycles.

If selected for promotion to staff sergeant by supplemental consideration, he be provided any additional supplemental consideration required as a result of that selection.

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 this application in Executive Session on 3 June 2003, 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 27 Jan 03, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 7 Feb 03.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Mar 03.

					WAYN R. GRACIE
								Panel Chair

AFBCMR BC-2003-00372

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 APPLICANT, be corrected to show that the Recommendation for Decoration Printout (RDP) (Décor-6), for the award of the Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM), First Oak Leaf Cluster (1OLC), covering the period 22 November 1988 through 14 November 1989 was signed by the commander on 15 November 1989, rather than 15 October 2002.

	It is further directed that he be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of staff sergeant (E-5) for the 90A5 through 93B5 cycles.

	If selected for promotion to staff sergeant by supplemental consideration, he be provided any additional supplemental consideration required as a result of that selection.

	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.

                                                                            
                                                                            Director
                                                                            Air Force Review Boards Agency