RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03945 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His records be corrected to reflect the Air Force Achievement 
Medal (AFAM) and his promotion test score be amended accordingly. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He missed promotion to technical sergeant by .25 points. After 
reviewing his records he realized that his AFAM was not in his 
records. He contacted his former supervisor who wrote and 
submitted him for the medal. His former supervisor wrote a 
letter to AFPC attesting to the submission and recommends AFPC 
award the medal to the applicant. 

 

He contacted the 60th Awards and Decorations office, but they 
could not find any records of his medal. He was directed to the 
U.S. Central Command (CENTAF) website to see if there were any 
records of his medal; however, there were none. 

 

His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant is currently serving on active duty in the Regular 
Air Force. 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the 
Air Force, which are at Exhibit C and D. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSID recommends denial. After contacting CENTAF, the 
original approval authority, they found that a recommendation for 
the AFAM was submitted; however, CENTAF reviewed the submission 
and the medal was disapproved. Further, although the applicant’s 



immediate supervisor and unit commander submitted a 
recommendation for the AFAM, the submission was considered by the 
appropriate approval authority and was disapproved. 

 

The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

AFPC/DPSOE defers to DPSID’s recommendation to deny the request. 
However, should the Board award him the AFAM and include it in 
his promotion score for cycle 12E6, he would become a selectee 
pending a favorable data verification check and the 
recommendation of his commander. 

 

The complete DPSOE 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 Jan 13 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 Air Force offices of primary responsibilityand adopt their 
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 basis to 
recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 

 

4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not 
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel 
will materially add to our understanding of the issue involved. 
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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-2012-03945 in Executive Session on 7 May 13, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Vice Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 31 Jul 12, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 19 Nov 12. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 14 Dec 12. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Jan 13.