RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00740 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. His records be corrected to reflect that he was not separated from active duty on 30 November 2011, but on that date he was continued on active duty and ordered Permanent Change of Station (PCS) to his home of selection (HOS) or home of record (HOR) pending further orders, without a break-in-service. 2. He be awarded the Meritorious Service Medal with second Oak Leaf Cluster (MSM, 2 OLC) for meritorious service during the period from 25 November 2008 to 30 November 2011. 3. He be retroactively promoted to the grade of lieutenant colonel (Lt Col) (O-5), with a date of rank (DOR) of 1 January 2012. (Examiner’s Note: The applicant was selected for promotion by a Special Selection Board (SSB) for the Calendar Year 2011A (CY11A) Lt Col Central Selection Board (CSB), effective and with a DOR of 1 January 2012, which has been confirmed by the Senate. As such, this portion of the application has been resolved administratively.) 4. His assignment history, specific to the 9 June 2008 duty status entry, be deleted and sanitized across all Air Force personnel system venues, to include the Officer Selection Brief (OSB) reviewed by the CY10A Lt Col CSB. (Examiner’s note: In the applicant’s rebuttal to the Air Force advisory opinions, he withdraws this request based on his promotion to Lt Col by an SSB.) 5. The AF Form 77, Letter of Evaluation (LOE), rendered for the period 1 February 2008 through 30 September 2008, be removed from his record to eliminate the “C” prefix Duty Air Force Specialty Code (DAFSC) associated with the original referral Officer Performance Report (OPR) that was voided, and replaced with the provided AF Form 77 for this period for entry into his official records. (Examiner’s note: In the applicant’s rebuttal to the Air Force advisory opinions, he withdraws this request based on his promotion to Lt Col by an SSB.) 6. The AF Form 77, LOE, rendered for the period 1 February 2008 through 30 September 2008, be amended to include the duty title of “commander.” (Examiner’s note: In the applicant’s rebuttal to the Air Force advisory opinions, he amends his application to include this request based on his promotion selection to Lt Col by an SSB.) 7. The draft AF Form 77, LOE, rendered for the period from 18 January 2011 to a date to be determined, be inserted into his official records to document missing evaluation reporting periods. (Examiner’s Note: In the applicant’s rebuttal to the Air Force advisory opinions, he amends this request to reflect that his 28 January 2011 Duty Title/DAFSC of “Deputy Director, Force Protection/R31P4” – USAFCENT should be reflected on the inserted AF Form 77.) 8. He be authorized to permanently wear the command insignia pin to reflect his completion of command. (Examiner’s Note: In his rebuttal to the Air Force advisory opinions, the applicant amended his application to include this request.) 9. The Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) reviewed by the CY10A Lt Col CSB be removed from his record and replaced with the corrected “Definitely Promote” (DP) PRF that he has provided. 10. His corrected record be considered for promotion to the grade of Lt Col by SSBs for the CY09A and CY10A Lt Col CSBs. (Examiner’s note: In the applicant’s rebuttal to the Air Force advisory opinions, he agrees with the OPR that there is no need for his corrected record to meet an SSB for the CY09A CSB and has therefore withdrawn this portion of his request). 11. If selected for promotion by the CY10A Lt Col CSB, any future non-selections for promotion to the grade of colonel in any zone, Below-the-Zone (BTZ) or In-the-Promotion-Zone (IPZ) prior to receiving at least three OPRs rendered in the grade of Lt Col, be set-aside. (Examiner’s note: While the applicant states any promotion zone, noting BTZ and IPZ, there is also an Above-the-Promotion-Zone (APZ).) 12. Any existing entries depicting his reassignment to duties at Buckley Air National Guard Base as a non-participating Reservist effective 1 December 2011, added as a result of the original involuntary separation be deleted/removed/sanitized from his military duty history. 13. He be awarded restitution, retroactive from his date of involuntary separation to the date of his reinstatement, to include the following: a. All back pay and allowances. b. Time-in-service credit. c. All earned benefits. d. Uninterrupted credit towards retirement. e. Accrual of ordinary military leave. 14. He be authorized adequate time to coordinate with the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS), to submit a remission of indebtedness package prior to settlement/recoupment of the involuntary separation pay he received upon his separation. 15. If reinstatement is not permissible, or deemed to not be in the best interests of the Air Force, he alternatively requests, at a minimum, that he be approved for retirement effective 1 August 2014, under the provisions of the Fiscal Year Temporary Early Retirement Authority (TERA) program – Phase II, with a time-in- grade and/or limited ADSC waiver(s) incorporating his promotion to the grade of Lt Col by an SSB, with continuous service from his original involuntary separation date. (Examiner’s note: In the applicant’s rebuttal to the Air Force advisory opinions, he amends his application to include this request.) ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Despite the Evaluation Reports Appeal Board’s (ERAB) decision on 27 March 2012 to void and remove his 2008 referral OPR, there exists inadvertent surviving evidence that negatively propagates the original injustice. This information results in additional injustices that may inhibit his return to active duty and/or wrongfully influence future promotion board consideration when compared to his peers. He concedes that while it cannot be conclusively determined whether or not this information will bias future promotion boards, it will serve to deprive him of fair and equitable consideration. As a result of his corrected record of performance, he was retroactively selected for promotion by a SSB. In addition, the original senior rater of his PRF prepared for the CY10A Lt Col CSB, re-accomplished the PRF with an overall recommendation of “Definitely Promote.” He requests the Board excuse his failure to timely file in the interest of justice. During the period since his separation, he has pursued the appropriate available avenues of administrative relief before appealing to the Board. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal statement; copies of the results of the SSB for the CY11A Lt Col CSB; an endorsed MSM, 2 OLC recommendation package; a proposed LOE; the OSB prepared for the CY10A Lt Col CSB; the LOE, closing 30 Sep 08; a proposed PRF, with supporting documentation; a DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty; a DD Form 215, Correction to DD Form 214; and a copy of his ERAB package. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Upon graduation from the Air Force Academy, the applicant was commissioned in the Regular Air Force on 29 May 1996 and entered active duty. He was progressively promoted to the grade of major (O-4) effective and with a DOR of 1 May 2008. While serving as the commander of the 366th Security Forces Squadron, the applicant was relieved of command on 21 August 2008 for inability to maintain good order and discipline. As a result the applicant received a referral OPR for the period 13 June 2008 through 30 September 2008. On 11 December 2008, the applicant filed a complaint with the Ninth Air Force, Inspector General’s (9th AF/IG) office, asserting that his command was unfairly terminated and the 366th Mission Support Group Commander (366th MSG/CC) fostered a hostile environment and threatened and abused the personnel under his command. The 9th AF/CC transferred the complaint to 12th AF/CC as it did not fall within their purview since the event happened at Mountain Home AFB, which is part of the 12th AF. The 12th AF/IG analysis of the complaint found no violation of policy, instruction, or regulation. The analysis further found the 366th MSG/CC acted within his authority in removing the applicant from command based on the applicant’s failure to maintain good order and discipline and his loss of trust in the applicant’s ability to command. The Air Combat Command Commander (ACC/CC) and Inspector General’s Office (ACC/IG) reviewed the 12th AF analysis and concurred in the dismissal of the complaint as frivolous, with no required reporting to SAF/IGQ, as the analysis did not reveal a violation of an articulable standard. On 24 December 2008, the applicant was advised of the resolution of his IG complaint and advised that he could request a higher- level review of the decision in writing within 90 days and provide additional information that was not available at the time of his original complaint. On 28 January 2011, the applicant was assigned as Deputy Director Force Protection, DAFSC R31P4, United States Air Force Central Command (USAFCENT), Shaw AFB, SC. On 19 September 2011, the applicant was awarded the MSM, 2 OLC for outstanding achievement during the period from 11 September 2010 to 18 March 2011. The applicant was considered and not selected for promotion to the grade of Lt Col by the CY10A (IPZ) and the CY11A (APZ) Lt Col CSBs. As a result, he met the CY11A Maj Continuation Board and was not selected for retention. On 30 November 2011, the ERAB considered and approved the applicant’s request to void the 30 September 2008 referral OPR and directed its removal; that an AF Form 77 be placed in his records documenting its removal, and that he be considered for promotion by an SSB for the Lt Col CY11A Lt Col CSB. On 30 November 2011, the applicant was separated, with severance pay, based on non-selection for permanent promotion. On 1 December 2011, the applicant accepted a commission in the Air Force Reserve and was assigned to the Non-obligated Non- participating Ready Personnel Section. On 1 January 2012, the applicant was considered and selected for promotion by an SSB for the Lt Col CY11A Lt Col CSB, with an effective date and DOR of 1 January 2012, which has been confirmed by the Senate. On 27 September 2012, the applicant was awarded the Bronze Star Medal, with one Oak Leaf Cluster (BSM, 1 OLC) for meritorious achievement during the period from 11 September 2010 to 18 March 2011. (Examiner’s Note: He was previously awarded the MSM, 2 OLC for outstanding achievement during the same inclusive period as the BSM, 1 OLC. IAW AFI 36-2803, The Air Force Military Awards and Decorations Program, paragraph 1.15.10 approval of multiple decorations for the same act, achievement, or period of service is considered dual recognition which is prohibited. Although no orders revoking the MSM, 2 OLC are contained in the Automated Records Management System (ARMS), according to the DD Form 215 issued on 6 December 2012 to correct the DD Form 214, issued in conjunction with the applicant’s 30 November 2011 separation, the MSM, 2 OLC was removed and replaced with the BSM, 1 OLC.) In accordance with paragraph 10.3.24 of AFI 36-2903, Dress and Personal Appearance of Air Force Personnel, dated 18 July 2011, paragraph 10.3.24, the command insignia pin is authorized for all eligible commissioned officers in the rank of colonel (O-6) and below, who were commanders of a squadron, group, wing, or other organizations identified by AFPC. In addition, they must possess and exercise Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) authority (appointed on G-Series orders). Vice and Deputy Commanders are not authorized wear of the insignia. However, they may wear the insignia as a graduated commander from previously held command positions. Flag Officers and Detachment Commanders are not authorized wear of the insignia. Paragraph 10.3.24.8 states that commanders must serve an entire tenure for permanent wear. (Examiner’s Note: Although no period of tenure is indicated in the current AFI, paragraph 5.10.2.9 of the previous AFI 36-2903, dated 2 August 2006, states that commanders must serve an entire tenure (usually two years) for permanent wear.) ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPALL recommends denying the applicant’s request to show a PCS to his home of record pending further orders; and, to remove the “C” prefix for his DAFSC. DPALL states the applicant was assigned and occupied a funded authorized Air Force billet which in itself does not reflect an injustice. In accordance with Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-1110 [sic], paragraph 1.1.2, “If the reason for PCS is not for the purpose of an airman filling a funded vacant manpower authorization and to perform duty in his or her AFSC, and selection of the airman was not based on individual qualifications and the PCS eligibility policies and procedures prescribed in this instruction, then the PCS is not within the authority of this instruction.” A PCS to home of selection or home of record pending further orders is not for the purpose of filling a funded vacant manpower authorization. If returned to active duty, the applicant will be given an assignment to a funded authorized vacancy per the needs of the Air Force. (Examiner’s Note: Although DPALL cites AFI 36-1110, as the governing instruction, this is apparently a typo, as the governing instruction is AFI 36-2110, Assignments, dated 8 June 2012.) DPALL recommends the applicant’s C-prefix and command duty title remain. DPALL indicates the “C” prefix will be affixed to an awarded AFSC in which duty as a commander is being performed. It will be retained as long as the officer remains qualified as a commander. Officers must hold the “C” prefix a minimum of 12 months experience in a command position before award. The applicant held the “C” prefix twice before taking the command billet at Mountain Home AFB. Once from 8 October 1997 to 29 January 1999, while assigned as the Section Commander at Ramstein Air Base, Germany, and again from 2 May 2005 to 17 July 2005, while assigned to Tyndall AFB, Florida. Combined, the total duration exceeds the 12 month minimum. Therefore, his AFSC appropriately reflects the “C” prefix. The complete DPALL evaluations, dated 15 May 2013 and 27 March 2013, are at Exhibits C and D. AFPC/DPSID defers to the Air Force Decoration Board on whether the applicant’s actions merit award of the MSM, 2 OLC. DPSID states that after a thorough review of the applicant’s official military personnel records, they were unable to locate a certificate or Special Order verifying his award of the MSM, 2 OLC. However, the applicant has provided a recommendation from his chain-of-command, dated 19 November 2012, as well as a proposed citation for award of the MSM, 2 OLC. DPSID recommends denying the applicant’s request to correct or amend his DAFSC on his 30 September 2008 Air Force Form 77. DPSID states there is insufficient evidence provided by the applicant to corroborate the AF Form 77 is unjust or inaccurate. Actually, the AF Form 77 is accurate and in accordance with AFI 36-2406, Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Systems, instructional guidance and Air Force policies and procedures. However, they recommend approval of his request to substitute the PRF prepared for the CY10A Lt Col CSB, with the re-accomplished “DP” PRF he has provided. Based on the ERAB’s decision to remove the 30 September 2008 referral OPR, the applicant was subsequently selected for promotion to the grade of Lt Col for the CY10A Lt Col CSB by an SSB. He provided a memorandum from his senior rater and the Management Level Review (MLR) president, both in support of his request to substitute his PRF with the re- accomplished “DP” PRF. After a further review of the original senior rater’s “DP” allotments for the CY10A Lt Col CSB, it was revealed he had seven “DPs” recommendations to award. Although the senior rater exhausted all seven, he affirmed that had the contested referral evaluation not been part of the applicant’s record of performance, he would have awarded him a “DP.” The re-accomplished PRF ultimately went through the supplemental MLR process in accordance with AFI 36-2406, paragraph 8.7, and was awarded the “DP” rating. With that in mind, they would agree with the results and recommend approval of his request to substitute the original “Promote” PRF, with the re-accomplished “DP” PRF. They defer consideration of any other aspects of the applicant’s appeal to the relevant appropriate agencies or offices of primary responsibility. The complete DPSID evaluations, dated 21 June 2013 and 23 August 2013, are at Exhibits E and F. AFPC/DPSOO recommends the applicant be considered by an SSB for the CY10A Lt Col CSB with the “DP” PRF in his OSR. In addition, based on his selection for promotion to the grade of Lt Col by the 10 September 2012 SSB, the reason for his release is no longer valid; therefore, they recommend he be reinstated to active duty as if he never separated. If reinstated to active duty, they concur with the applicant that any IPZ non-selections to the grade of colonel, prior to him receiving a minimum of three OPRs, with at least 250 days of supervision in the grade of Lt Col, be set-aside. Since BTZ non-selections do not count, they do not concur that they should be set-aside. Since no changes were made to the applicant’s record before the CY09A Lt Col CSB, there are no grounds for SSB consideration for that board. The complete DPSOO evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit G. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He concurs with the DPSOO advisory opinion. However, if reinstatement is not permissible, or deemed to be not in the best interests of the Air Force, he requests, a 1 August 2014 retirement under the Fiscal Year Temporary Early Retirement Authority (TERA) program, with time-in-grade and/or limited Active Duty Service Commitment waivers, incorporating his promotion by the SSB and reflecting continuous service from the date of his involuntary separation date. He non-concurs with the recommendation provided by DPALL in their 27 March 2013 memorandum in regard to his request to show that he was PCS’d to his Home of Record. He does not believe the reviewing official understood the scope of his original request. The intent behind his request was to identify a methodology to administratively document the historical period between original involuntary separation (1 December 2011) through date of reinstatement. In regard to award of the MSM, 2 OLC, he agrees with the DPSID recommendation to submit his decoration package to the Air Force Decorations Review Board for determination on whether his actions during his assignment at USAFCENT merits award of the MSM, 2 OLC, which has been favorably endorsed by the organizational approval authority. As reflected on his duty history information in the virtual Military Personnel Flight, his Duty Title/DAFSC on the inserted AF Form 77 should accurately incorporate and/or reflect “Deputy Director, Force Protection” – USAFCENT. Further, any existing entries depicting reassignment to duties at Buckley Air National Guard Base as a non-participating Reservist effective 1 December 2011, added as a result of the original involuntary separation be deleted/removed/sanitized from his military duty history. Based on the statements by DPALL, DPSID and DPSOO, retention of the “C” prefix and commander duty title is unanimously endorsed based on recognition of his meeting the “fully qualified” commander prerequisites as outlined by the Air Force Classification Directory, Section I-B. This endorsement is despite his curtailed tour of duty as the Security Forces Squadron Commander at Mountain Home AFB. In light of the tour of duty being curtailed directly as a causal effect of the injustice, he requests approval by the AFBCMR for permanent wear of the commander’s [sic] insignia pin to reflect completion of command, despite the fact that he did not serve the entire tenure (usually two years) for permanent wear, as required by paragraph 5.10.2.9 of AFI 36-2903, dated 2 August 2006. In addition, he acknowledges the rationale as to why there should be no corrected record to meet the CY09B Lt Col CSB and supports the advisory recommendations that his record meet an SSB for the CY10A Lt Col CSB, with the re-accomplished “DP” PRF in his records. The applicant’s complete rebuttal is at Exhibit I. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The application was timely filed, since the three-year period for filing, as required under 10 USC § 1552(b), tolls while a member is serving on active duty. We note the applicant separated on 30 November 2011 and his application is dated 13 February 2013. 3. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice to warrant to following relief: a. Amending the AF Form 77, closing 30 September 2008, to include the duty title “Commander.” a. Reinstatement to active duty with no break-in-service. b. Revoking the MSM, 2 OLC awarded on 19 September 2011, for outstanding achievement during the period from 11 September 2010 to 18 March 2011. c. Correcting his record to show that he was not separated from active duty on 30 November 2011, but on that date, he continued to serve on active duty and was ordered PCS to his home of selection (HOS) or home of record (HOR) pending further orders. d. Awarding him the MSM, 2 OLC, for meritorious service during the period from 25 November 2008 to 30 November 2011. e. Removing the “promote” PRF prepared for the CY10A Lt Col from his record and replacing it with the re-accomplished “DP” PRF. f. Providing his corrected record, to include the PRF reflecting an overall promotion recommendation of “DP,” promotion consideration by an SSB for the CY10A Lt Col CSB. g. Setting aside any future non-selections for promotion to the grade of colonel until such time as he has received at least three OPRs with at least 250 days of supervision in the grade of lieutenant colonel. 4. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of records and noting the applicant’s contentions, we find that corrective action is necessary in order to provide the applicant full and fitting relief. In this respect, we note the ERAB removed a referral OPR, closing 30 September 2008, from the applicant’s records and provided him promotion consideration by an SSB for the CY11A Lt Col CSB. As a result of this supplemental promotion consideration, the applicant was retroactively promoted to the grade of Lt Col and awarded a DOR of 1 January 2012, which has been confirmed by the Senate. AFPC/DPSOO indicates that based on his promotion to Lt Col, the reason for his release from active duty on 30 November 2011 is no longer valid; therefore, they recommend he be reinstated to active duty, as if he was never separated. We concur. We also agree with the favorable recommendations of DPSID and DPSOO to replace the original “promote” PRF with the re-accomplished “DP” PRF, based on the support obtained from the original senior rater and the results of the supplemental MLR. Further, in order to provide the applicant an opportunity to build a sufficient competitive record for promotion, we recommend any promotion non-selections to the grade of colonel be set aside until such time as he has had at least three OPRs rendered with at least 250 days supervision in the grade of Lt Col. In addition, we find a sufficient basis to amend the AF Form 77, closing 30 September 2008, to include the duty title “Commander,” since it reflects a DAFSC of “C31P3,” denoting that he was a commander at the time. In accordance with the governing instruction an AF Form 77 should include a duty title as of the thru date. We note the OPRs have all endorsed retention of the “C” prefix and commander duty title and the applicant concurs with its retention. We recognize the applicant had initially requested that his 9 June 2008 duty history be removed out of concern that such an entry, along with the fact that his tour was curtailed prior to the standard two-year time-on-station length would continue the negative perception that he was removed from command for cause. However, based on his promotion selection by an SSB, he concedes the AF Form 77, containing the “C” DAFSC prefix offers an honest picture of his whole person concept and future potential. We agree. Although AFPC/DPSID defers to the Air Force Decoration Board (AFDB) on whether the applicant’s actions merit the award of an MSM, the only MSM nominations the AFDB considers are those of foreign officers. In support of the applicant’s request for the MSM, 2 OLC, for meritorious service during the period from 25 November 2008 to 30 November 2011, he provides a completed recommendation package. The recommending official states that he is intimately familiar with the injustice the applicant suffered. He also states that a conscious decision was made not to submit a decoration upon the applicant’s separation to avoid further compounding his appeal efforts with the AFBCMR by requiring further correction. The delegated approval authority for MSMs for USAFCENT permanent party members has endorsed the recommendation package, indicating that he has reviewed the matter and concurs with awarding the MSM. In view of this evidence, we find a sufficient basis to support awarding the MSM, 2 OLC. In addition, while DPSID states they were unable to locate a certificate verifying the applicant’s award of the MSM, 2 OLC, the documentation submitted in support of his application and his ARMS record both contain a copy of the MSM, 2 OLC, awarded for outstanding achievement during the period from 11 September 2010 to 18 March 2011. However, his ARMS record indicates that he was subsequently awarded the BSM, 1 OLC, for meritorious achievement during the same period. In accordance with AFI 36-2803, paragraph 1.15.10, approval of multiple decorations for the same act, achievement, or period of service is considered dual-recognition which is prohibited. No orders revoking the MSM, 2 OLC for outstanding achievement are contained in the applicant’s record. Nonetheless, according to the DD Form 215 issued on 6 December 2012 to correct the DD Form 214, issued in conjunction with his 30 November 2011 separation, the MSM, 2 OLC was removed and replaced with the BSM, 1 OLC. We recognize that once he is reinstated to active duty the DD Forms 214 and 215 will be declared void and no longer matters of record. In view of this and absent any revocation order, there will be nothing in his records invalidating the MSM, 2 OLC awarded for outstanding achievement. Therefore, in the interest of expeditiously correcting his record prior to his promotion consideration by an SSB and in order to officially memorialize the revocation of this decoration, we recommend action be taken to revoke this award. Therefore, based on the foregoing, we recommend his records be corrected to the extent indicated below. 5. A number of the applicant’s requests have already been administratively corrected or will be a consequence of our recommended corrective action. As indicated above, the applicant has already been promoted to the grade of Lt Col, with a DOR of 1 January 2012, which has been confirmed by the Senate. Once our recommended corrective action has been effected by the appropriate OPRs, his records will be reconstructed to appear as though he never left active duty. These measures will include, removing any existing duty history entry depicting his reassignment to the NNRPS, his HOR being reflected as Florida, and the placement of an AF Form 77 in his records to document any period during which an evaluation report was not rendered. Additionally, once DFAS is advised of the corrective measures, they will perform the necessary actions to ensure the applicant receives all monetary benefits to which he is entitled. Such entitlements will include receipt of all retroactive back pay and allowances, time-in-service credit, all earned benefits, uninterrupted credit towards retirement, accrual of ordinary military leave, and TSP contributions. We also note that in his response to the Air Force evaluations, the applicant acknowledges the rationale as to why there should be no corrected record set before an SSB for the CY09B Lt Col CSB. In addition, based on his promotion selection by an SSB for the CY11A Lt Col CSB, he has withdrawn his request for removal of the 9 June 2008 assignment history entry and removal of the C” prefix from his DAFSC on the AF Form 77, closing 30 September 2008. In view of our above recommendation to reinstate him to active duty, his request for a 1 August 2014 TERA retirement is moot. As such, the foregoing requests require no action by this Board. However, after corrective action has been taken, should the applicant believe that his records are still incorrect or unjust, he may request reconsideration at that time. 6. Notwithstanding the above, we find insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice concerning his request for the following: a. Restitution. b. Authorizing adequate time to coordinate with DFAS to submit a remission of indebtedness package prior to settlement/recoupment of involuntary separation pay. c. Placing the proposed AF Form 77, with a start date of 18 January 2011, reflecting his 28 January 2011 Duty Title/DAFSC of “Deputy Director, Force Protection/R31P4” – USAFCENT, in his records. d. Authorizing him to permanently wear the command insignia pin. 7. Under the authority of 10 U.S.C. § 1552, this Board may, on behalf of the Secretary, correct any record in order to correct an error or to remove an injustice. However, our authority is limited to the correction of a record. The only monetary benefit we may award is that which results from a record correction. In view of this, we have no authority to award restitution. We also cannot direct another government agency to take certain actions. Hence, we have no authority to direct DFAS to allow the applicant sufficient time to submit a remission of indebtedness package prior to settlement/recoupment of the involuntary separation pay he previously received. However, upon his reinstatement, the applicant may submit an application for remission of the debt to the Secretary of the Air Force Remissions Board through his local financial service office and the Air Force Financial Services Center. Once his remission application is submitted, recoupment actions may be suspended until such time as a decision has been rendered. We also find no basis to direct the proposed AF Form 77, with a start date of 18 January 2011, reflecting his 28 January 2011 Duty Title/DAFSC of “Deputy Director, Force Protection/R31P4” – USAFCENT be placed in his records. As indicated above, once he is reinstated to active duty in accordance with the governing regulation an AF Form 77 will be placed in his records documenting the absence of any evaluation report. If after such corrections are made to his records and he believes the AF Form 77 is incorrect or unjust, he may request reconsideration of this portion of his application at that time. The applicant requests to be authorized to permanently wear the command insignia pin since the curtailment of his command tour-of-duty was a causal effect of the injustice. We disagree. While the referral report has been removed from his records by the ERAB, there has been no showing that he meets the criteria for permanent wear of the command insignia pin. The evidence of record reflects the applicant has two qualifying periods during which he served as a squadron commander, i.e., 2 May 2005 through 16 July 2005 and 9 June 2008 through 24 November 2008, for an aggregate of 8 months and 29 days. However, as conceded by the applicant, he never completed the full tenure of the command, normally a two-year period. Although the applicant previously served as a section commander from 2 May 2005 to 17 July 2005, which when combined with his aforementioned duty as a squadron commander, entitles him to the commander “C” prefix to his DAFSC, in accordance with AFI 36-2903 duty performed as a section commander is not credible when determining eligibility to permanently wear the command insignia pin. In view of this, we do not believe he is entitled to permanently wear the command insignia pin. Therefore, in view of the above and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon which to recommend favorable consideration of these requests. 8. 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 issues involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. ________________________________________________________________ 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 AF Form 77, Letter of Evaluation, rendered for the period through 1 February 2008 through 30 September 2008, be amended in Section I.5, Duty Title or Title of Additional Duty, to reflect “Commander.” b. The Meritorious Service Medal, Second Oak Leaf Cluster (MSM, 2 OLC) awarded on 19 September 2011 for outstanding achievement during the period from 11 September 2010 to 18 March 2011, be revoked. c. He was not separated from active duty on 30 November 2011, but on that date, he continued to serve on active duty and was ordered permanent change of station to his home of selection or home of record, pending further orders. d. He be awarded the MSM, 2 OLC, for meritorious service during the period from 25 November 2008 to 30 November 2011. e. The AF Form 709, Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF) for the Calendar Year (CY) 2010A Lieutenant Colonel (Lt Col) Central Selection Board (CSB) reflecting an overall promotion recommendation of “Promote” be removed from his record and replaced with the re-accomplished PRF, reflecting an overall recommendation of “Definitely Promote (DP).” f. His corrected record, to include the PRF reflecting an overall promotion recommendation of “DP,” be considered by an Special Selection Board (SSB) for the CY10A Lt Col CSB. We also recommend that any future non-selections for promotion to the grade of colonel, prior to receiving at least three Officer Performance Reports (OPRs) with at least 250 days of supervision in the grade of lieutenant colonel, be set-aside. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-00740 in Executive Session on 20 March 2014 and 31 July 2014, 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 13 Feb 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B. IG Case File Worksheet, w/atchs (Withdrawn). Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPALL, dated 27 Mar 13. Exhibit D. Memorandum, AFPC/DPALL, dated 15 May 13. Exhibit E. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSID, dated 21 Jun 13. Exhibit F. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSID, dated 23 Aug 13. Exhibit G. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOO, dated 23 Oct 13, w/atchs. Exhibit H. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 Dec 13. Exhibit I. Letter, Applicant, dated 9 Jan 13[sic], w/atchs. 1 2