RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-01815
		INDEX CODES:  107.00, 131.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to reflect award of the Meritorious Service Medal, Third Oak Leaf Cluster (MSM, 3OLC).

He be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of chief master sergeant for cycles 05E9 and 06E9, with inclusion of the MSM, 3OLC.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Upon his permanent change of station (PCS), he was not recommended for an end of tour decoration because of an unjust Enlisted Performance Report (EPR).  He submitted an application with the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) requesting the report be voided and removed from his records, which was approved by the Board.  Subsequently, the 66th Air Base Wing Commander forwarded a memorandum to the 100th Air Refueling Commander (100 ARW/CC) requesting that he be awarded an end of tour decoration.  However, the 100th ARW, without providing any justification, disapproved the decoration.  There is evidence that suggests the 100 ARW/CC ignored guidance from the Secretary of the Air Force (SAF) and the Board and continued to use the information in the voided EPR as the justification to disapprove the decoration, which is unjust and wrong.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of the AFBCMR decision, Letter of Evaluation, decoration package, EPRs, and MSM citation.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Information extracted from the Personnel Data System (PDS) indicates the applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of chief master sergeant.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIDR recommends the Board render a decision based on the documentation provided.  They note the applicant appealed to the Board requesting that his EPR closing 9 Sep 04 be voided and removed from his records, which he believes was the basis for the denial of the MSM, 3OLC.  On 27 May 07, the Board recommended the EPR be voided and removed from his records, and that he be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of chief master sergeant for all appropriate cycles, beginning with cycle 05E9.  The applicant went back to the approval authority for consideration of the MSM, 3OLC based on the removal of the EPR.  On 17 Dec 07, he was informed by electronic mail (e-mail) the MSM, 3OLC was disapproved.  The applicant believed the approval authority ignored the guidance from the Secretary of the Air Force and the Board and continued to use the information in the voided EPR as the justification to disapprove the decoration.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIDR evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPSOE indicates that should the Board award the decoration, it would not automatically entitle the applicant to supplemental promotion consideration for cycles 05E9 and 06E9 as it was not a matter of record at the time selections were made in Oct 05 and Nov 06.  However, if the Board grantS the request, it could direct supplemental promotion consideration beginning with cycle 05E9.  

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and furnished a detailed response indicating that AFPC/DPSIDR offered no challenge to his request.  In fact, they reemphasized his complaint of wrong in that the 100 ARW/CC ignored the previous guidance from the SAF and AFBCMR and continued to use the information in the previously voided EPR as the justification to disapprove the decoration.  However, a careful review of the advisory opinion from AFPC/DPSOE causes him great concern.  It gives the impression of a “form letter” response and is not indicative of an impartial and honest position based on the facts presented.  The advisory also contained errors.  

If the Board decides in his favor regarding the decoration, he requests the Board grant him a back-dated direct promotion through the correction of records process.  Because of his superior record of performance, he believes he would have been promoted to chief master sergeant during the first eligible cycle had it not been for the unjust EPR and subsequent disapproval of an earned decoration.

Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

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 regarding the applicant’s request for award of the MSM, 3OLC.  The majority of the Board notes the applicant successfully appealed an EPR which he believed precluded his award of the contested MSM, 3OLC.  He asserts that notwithstanding the removal of the report from his records, the decoration approval authority subsequently disapproved awarding him the medal, without providing any justification for doing so.  The applicant believes the approval authority continued to use information that was in the now voided EPR as justification for disapproving the decoration.  After an exhaustive review of the available evidence, the majority believes sufficient doubt has been raised regarding the fairness of the disapproval of the MSM, 3OLC, which should be resolved in the favor of the applicant.  Accordingly, the majority recommends that his records be corrected to reflect award of the MSM, 3OLC, and he be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of chief master sergeant, beginning with cycle 05E9.  The applicant’s request for a back-dated promotion to the grade of chief master sergeant was noted.  However, no evidence has been presented which convinces the majority the applicant would be precluded from receiving fair and equitable consideration through the supplemental promotion process.  Therefore, the majority believes his records should only be corrected to the extent recommended above.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that he was awarded the Meritorious Service Medal, Third Oak Leaf Cluster, for meritorious service during the period 21 Jan 02 to 15 Jan 05.

It is further recommended that he be provided supplemental consideration for promotion to the grade of chief master sergeant for all appropriate cycles, beginning with cycle 05E9.

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 she 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2008-01815 in Executive Session on 29 Oct 08, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

XXXXXXXXXX, Panel Chair
XXXXXXXXXX, Member
XXXXXXXXXX, Member

By a majority vote, the Board voted to correct the records, as recommended. XXXXXXXXXX voted to deny relief but did not desire to submit a minority report.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 8 May 08, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIDR, dated 17 Jun 08.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 23 Jun 08.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Jul 08.
     Exhibit F.  Letter, applicant, dated 18 Aug 08, w/atchs.

                                   XXXXXXXXXX
                                   Panel Chair