RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBERS:  BC-2003-00838
		INDEX CODE:  131.00
		COUNSEL:  None

		HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her date of rank (DOR) to staff sergeant (SSgt) be corrected and her Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM) for the period 31 May 1995 through 31 May 1999 be considered in supplemental promotion consideration for the cycle 00E5.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

In March 2000, as she was preparing to compete for promotion to staff sergeant, MSgt XXXX reviewed her military personnel records and asked her if she had been submitted for an end-of-tour decoration at Offutt AFB.  She told MSgt W. that an Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM) was submitted for her work at Offutt.  MSgt XXXXX checked the status of the decoration and informed her that the AFAM was not in her records.  He called HQ AFOSI and Offutt AFB to track it down.  MSgt W. learned the 55th Support Group military personnel flight had no record of approval or disapproval of a decoration for the applicant.  Apparently, the entire recommendation for decoration was lost in processing.  MSgt XXXXX recognized the need to get the process for the decoration restarted before the eligibility cutoff date of 31 March 2000.  On 7 March 2000, MSgt XXXXX notified TSgt N., Chief of Personnel for AFOSI Region 3, of the situation regarding her decoration.  MSgt XXXXX obtained a replacement Recommendation for Decoration Printout (RDP) (DÉCOR 6) from TSgt N. and faxed it to MSgt XXXXX (SIC), who resubmitted the applicant’s nomination for the AFAM.  MSgt XXXXX then informed the Region 3’s leaders of the applicant’s situation.

She tested for promotion in cycle 00E5 and when the results were released she found out she was less than one point away from the cutoff score.  She was hopeful that with the one point awarded under the Weighted Airman Promotion System (WAPS) for an AFAM that she would be promoted under that cycle with supplemental consideration as provided for in AFI 36-2502.

Her new supervisor, MSgt XXXXX checked on the status of the resubmitted AFAM and learned the nomination had been lost again.  
MSgt P. submitted a second resubmission for the decoration with the assistance of the 55th Services Squadron.  The decoration was approved and she requested supplemental consideration by the Air Force Enlisted Promotions Branch (AFPC/DPPW) on 30 July 2001.  The request included a copy of the now-approved decoration and the DÉCOR 6,with a printed date of 7 March 2000.  On 8 February 2002, via e-mail, AFPC/DPPPW stated that without the benefit of the original DÉCOR 6 showing an endorsement dated before the PECD, they would not be able to grant her request to have the AFAM included in the computing of her 00E5 WAPS score.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 31 May 1995, in the grade of airman basic for a period of four years.

Promotion selections for the cycle 00E5 were made on 10 July 2000, with public release on 19 July 2000.  The total weighted promotion score required for selection in the applicant’s Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) was 262.77.  The applicant’s total weighted promotion score was 262.40.

Special Orders GB-00216, dated 18 July 2001, awarded the applicant the AFAM for the period 31 May 1995 to 16 March 2000.  The Special Orders indicated the Recommendation for Decoration Printout (RDP) was dated 9 March 2001.  The AFAM is worth one (1) point in the computation of a member’s total promotion score.

For a decoration to be eligible for consideration in a promotion cycle, the close-out date of the decoration must be on or before the Promotion Eligibility Cutoff Date (PECD), and the date of the RDP must be before the date of selections for the cycle in question.

Since the RDP was prepared after selections for the cycle were announced, the decoration was not considered in the promotion process for cycle 00E5.

The applicant was selected for promotion to the grade of staff sergeant during cycle 01E5, with a date of rank of 1 October 2001.

The applicant was released from active duty on 30 July 2002, in accordance with AFI 36-3208, Completion of Required Active Service.  She served seven years and two months of active duty.

On 25 February 2003, Special Orders GB-00216 were amended to reflect inclusive dates for the AFAM as 31 May 1995 to 31 May 1999.

Applicant’s EPR profile is listed below.

			PERIOD ENDING		OVERALL EVALUATION

		30 Jan 97				5
		30 Jan 98				5
		30 Jan 99				5
		20 Oct 99				5
		29 Jun 00				5
		 4 May 01				5
		 4 May 02				5

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPPRP states that decorations will be submitted into official channels (signed by the recommending official and endorsed by the next higher official in the chain of command) within two years, and awarded within three years, of the act, accomplishment  or service.  The  original  closeout  date  was 16 March 2000, but was changed to 31 May 1999 on 25 February 2003, and the original  request  for  the RDP  was  reflected as 9 March 2001, but was changed to 9 March 2000 on 26 July 2001.  The RDP date was based on a DÉCOR 6 which was invalid because it was not signed by the supervisor, and the squadron commander who did sign it did not date it.  Therefore, this was not the third DÉCOR 6, submitted with the recommendation package that was approved.  The applicant believes a third DÉCOR 6 had to have been ordered, since the second package (with the 9 March 2000 DÉCOR 6) was lost.  Therefore, the applicant’s decoration was processed and awarded within the specified time limits.

Based on the documentation the applicant provided, it cannot be verified when the third recommendation package was submitted.  The second package was submitted after 9 March 2000, but was lost, however, the DÉCOR 6 the applicant provided was from the second submission, not the third.  Furthermore, when the decoration was amended the applicant did not ensure that a copy of the amendment was placed in her records.  The second amendment which changed the inclusive dates of the decoration was published more than six months after the applicant separated from active duty.  Therefore, since the decoration was processed with the required two years of the act, service or accomplishment, DPPPR has no action regarding the applicant’s case.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPPWB states that before a decoration is credited for a specific promotion cycle, the closeout date of the decoration must be on or before the promotion eligibility cutoff date (PECD).  The date of the DÉCOR-6 Recommendation for Decoration Printout (RDP), must be before the date of selections for the cycle in question.  The PECD is established for each promotion cycle to determine which Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC), as well as which performance reports and decorations are to be used in the promotion consideration process.  A decoration must be verified and documented that it was placed into official channels prior to the selection date.

The applicant’s decoration does not meet the criteria for promotion during cycle 00E5 because the DÉCOR 6 was not signed or dated by the applicant’s supervisor.  This policy was initiated to preclude personnel from submitting someone after promotion selections for a decoration with a retroactive decoration effective date, to put them over the selection cutoff score.  Exceptions to this 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 into military channels within the prescribed time limit and conclusive evidence the recommendation was not acted upon through loss or inadvertence.  The Air Force Awards and Decorations program in accordance with AFI 36-2803 states a decoration is considered to have been placed into the official channels when the decoration recommendation is signed by the initiating official and indorsed by a higher official in the chain of command.

After an extensive review of the circumstances of this case, DPPPWB states there is no conclusive evidence that the applicant’s decoration was placed into official channels prior to the date promotions were announced for cycle 00E5 and her becoming aware that she had missed promotion by less than one point.  To approve the applicant’s request would not be fair or equitable to others in the same situation that missed promotion selection by a narrow margin and are not entitled to have an “after the fact” decoration count in the promotion process.  The Promotion Management Section at the Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC) disapproved the applicant’s request to have her decoration included in the promotion process as an exception to policy.  If the dates placed into the official channels were changed, it would not automatically entitle her to be considered for any previous promotion cycles because it was not a matter of record at the time selections were made.

Based on the rationale provided they recommend denying the requested relief.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 11 July 2003, for review and response.  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.	Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.  After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of records, it appears that through no fault of the applicant’s, the contested award was not properly processed in time for it to be considered during promotion cycle 00E5.  In this respect, we note the statements from the applicant’s supervisor, Superintendent, of AFOSI Detachment 301, Region 3, and the Chief, Military Personnel regarding their diligent efforts in trying to follow-up on the progress of the award through the chain of command.  Further, it also appears that the applicant’s new command made several inquiries regarding the whereabouts of the award.  It is apparent that this was not an after-the-fact award based upon her nonselection for promotion.  Clearly, it was the intent of the applicant’s chain of command to have this award in her records during the next promotion cycle, however, due to numerous administrative shortfalls, the award “fell through the cracks.”  In view of the foregoing, the Board is persuaded that the applicant should not have to bear the burden of her command not processing the award in a timely manner.  Therefore, we recommend her 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 (RDP)(Décor-6), for the award of the Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM), covering the period 31 May 1995 through 31 May 1999, was signed by the commander on 9 March 2000, rather than 9 March 2001.

It is further recommended that she be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of staff sergeant for all appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 00E5, with the AFAM included in her record.

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 qualification 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 applicant was promoted to the higher grade on the date of rank established by the supplemental promotion and that applicant is entitled to all pay, allowances, and benefits of such grade as of that date.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-00838 in Executive Session on 26 August 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 3 Mar 03, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 24 Jun 03.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 26 Jun 03.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Jul 03.

			
			Panel Chair

AFBCMR BC-2003-00838

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 XXXXX , be corrected to show that the Recommendation for Decoration Printout (RDP)(Décor-6), for the award of the Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM), covering the period 31 May 1995 through 31 May 1999, was signed by the commander on 9 March 2000, rather than 9 March 2001.

     It is further directed that she be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of staff sergeant for all appropriate cycles beginning with cycle 00E5, with the AFAM included in her record.

     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 qualification 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 applicant was promoted to the higher grade on the date of rank established by the supplemental promotion and that applicant is entitled to all pay, allowances, and benefits of such grade as of that date.

		
		Director
		Air Force Review Boards Agency