RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-02465
		INDEX CODE:  107.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM), awarded for service between July 1999 and July 2001, be upgraded to the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She resubmitted her application to the Wing Commander (WG/CC) at Moody AFB and, after a lengthy review the WG/CC’s decision was to not upgrade her AFAM to an AFCM.  While she respects his decision, she disagrees with it and contends he purposely used words in his response to make it appear as though her performance during the period was only slightly above average.  She states her Enlisted Performance Reports (EPR’s) contain all the factual data needed to make an informed decision.  Her supervisor fought for the upgrade but was also unsuccessful.

In support of her appeal, the applicant has provided a personal statement and copies of the letter from the Moody AFB WG/CC, copies of her EPR’s, several letters of support, her award certificate and order, and copies of her previous AFBCMR application.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

As part of a Permanent Change of Station (PCS) action from Moody AFB, GA to McGuire AFB, NJ, she was submitted for award of the AFCM for meritorious service between the dates 21 July 1999 to 15 July 2001.  Her award was downgraded to the AFAM.  After her PCS to McGuire AFB, she applied to the AFBCMR to have her medal upgraded.  She was told until she appealed to the WG/CC at Moody AFB that she hadn’t exhausted all available administrative remedies.  She appealed to the WG/CC and on 11 October 2005, the WG/CC upheld the downgrade.  She is currently serving in the grade of technical sergeant and has over 19 years of active military service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPR recommends denial.  DPPPR cites the approval authority’s denial and base their denial on his comment. 

DPPPR’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 10 February 2006 for review and comment 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.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2004-02465 in Executive Session on 28 March 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 27 Dec 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 30 Jan 06.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Feb 06.