RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01518 INDEX CODE: 131.01 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Air Medals (AM) first (1OLC) and second oak leaf clusters (2OLC), awarded for the periods 30 June 2003 to 15 February 2004 and 17 February 2004 to 29 April 2004; his Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) dated 18 January 2005, be included in his promotion cycle 05E6 selection process to technical sergeant (TSgt). ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was not put in for the medals in a timely manner due to a clerical error through no fault of his own. The medals were supposed to be in official channels well before the promotion cutoff eligibility date (PECD) to count towards his 05E6 Weighted Airman Promotion System (WAPS) score. Once the medals were belatedly awarded, AFPC refused his request to credit points to his 05E6 WAPS score. Because the medals were not submitted and approved in a timely manner due to administrative errors beyond his control, he has missed his promotion opportunity to TSgt. In support of his application, applicant provided a personal statement, a letter from his squadron superintendent, emails, and copies of his Air Medals. Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ _ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of staff sergeant as an Airborne Systems Engineer. He was considered and not selected for promotion to the grade of TSgt in the 05E6, 06E6, and 07E6 promotion cycles. The applicant's total weighted promotion score for cycle 05E6 was 306.77 and the score required for selection in his Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) was 314.32. If the AMs and AFCM (totaling nine points) were counted in the applicant's total score, he would become a selectee with a promotion selection number of 8994.9, which incremented 1 July 2006. ________________________________________________________________ _ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE defers to the recommendation of DPPPR. Should the Board direct changing the dates on the AMs only, the applicant would remain a nonselect for promotion to TSgt during cycle 05E6. However, if the Board approved changing the dates on all three decorations, the applicant would become a selectee with a promotion selection number of 8994.9. AFPC/DPSOE's complete evaluation is at Exhibit B. AFPC/DPPPR recommends approval and states based on the evidence provided, the applicant’s AMs were not approved in a timely manner due to administrative error; therefore, recommend approval of the applicant’s request changing the dates of the AMs to reflect the timeframe necessary for reconsideration for his promotion to TSgt. DPPPR recommends disapproval for the AFCM; as the generated Decor6 (initiating the decoration) was not produced until January 2005; which is after the PECD of 31 December 2004. AFPC/DPPPR’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 2 November 2007 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 applicant’s complete submission, we are convinced the two AMs and the AFCM should have been considered in the selection process for the 05E6 promotion cycle. We note that the applicant provided statements from his commander and superintendent indicating the decorations should have been processed in a timely manner and the leadership takes full responsibility for the delay in the approval process. With no basis to question the veracity of the letters provided by the commander and superintendent, and in recognition of the applicant’s service to the Nation, it is our opinion that, based on these facts, any doubt should be resolved in the applicant's favor. It is apparent that these were not after-the-fact awards based upon his non-selection for promotion. Clearly, it was the intent of the applicant’s chain of command to have these awards in his records during the 05E6 promotion cycle; however, due to numerous administrative shortfalls the awards fell through the cracks. We therefore recommend the applicant be considered for supplemental promotion and 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: a. The Recommendation for Decoration Printout (RDP) (Décor- 6), for the award of the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM), covering the period 30 October 2001 through 20 August 2004, was signed by the commander on 1 November 2004 rather than 18 January 2005. b. USCENTAF FORM 1, Air Medal (AM) and Aerial Achievement Medal (AAM) Mission Information – Justification Sheet, for the award of the Air Medal (AM), first oak leaf cluster (1OLC) covering the period 30 June 2003 through 15 February 2004, was signed by the commander on 22 September 2004 rather than 27 July 2005. c. USCENTAF FORM 1, Air Medal (AM) and Aerial Achievement Medal (AAM) Mission Information – Justification Sheet, for the award of the Air Medal (AM), second oak leaf cluster (2OLC) covering the period 17 February 2004 through 29 April 2004, was signed by the commander on 22 September 2004 rather than 27 July 2005. It is further recommended that the applicant be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of technical sergeant beginning with cycle 05E6. If selected for promotion to the grade of technical 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 qualification for the promotion. ________________________________________________________________ _ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC- 2007-01518 in Executive Session on 24 January 2008, 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 16 May 07, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 21 Sep 07. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 9 Oct 07. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 Nov 07. AFBCMR BC-2007-01518 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 XXXXXXX, XXXXXXX, be corrected to show that: a. The Recommendation for Decoration Printout (RDP) (Décor-6), for the award of the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM), covering the period 30 October 2001 through 20 August 2004, was signed by the commander on 1 November 2004 rather than 18 January 2005. b. USCENTAF FORM 1, Air Medal (AM) and Aerial Achievement Medal (AAM) Mission Information – Justification Sheet, for the award of the Air Medal (AM), first oak leaf cluster (1OLC) covering the period 30 June 2003 through 15 February 2004, was signed by the commander on 22 September 2004 rather than 27 July 2005. c. USCENTAF FORM 1, Air Medal (AM) and Aerial Achievement Medal (AAM) Mission Information – Justification Sheet, for the award of the Air Medal (AM), second oak leaf cluster (2OLC) covering the period 17 February 2004 through 29 April 2004, was signed by the commander on 22 September 2004 rather than 27 July 2005. It is further directed that the applicant be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of technical sergeant beginning with cycle 05E6. If selected for promotion to the grade of technical 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 qualification for the promotion.