RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03240 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The décor 6 [Request for Decoration Printout (RDP)] date and Given Under Hand date for his Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM), dated 14 Nov 13, be changed to 15 Nov 11, the original date it should have been processed. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His decoration was not properly processed and became “lost in the system” for nearly two years. Part of the problem was due to his early departure for retraining and his unit relocated from one base to another. After following up several times, the award was recreated; however, the “new” RDP date [the date the award is considered placed in official channels] was after the promotion board selection results were made. If the decoration had been processed in a timely manner, the three promotion points earned for the AFCM would have put him above the cut off score for selection to technical sergeant (E-6) in 2013. Further, he is concerned he is eligible for a retention board because he was not selected for promotion. His previous supervisor and unit commander have submitted statements attesting to the award being initiated in 2011, the applicant inquiring about his lost decoration prior to his non-selection for promotion, and the administrative errors were beyond his control. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is currently serving as a member of the Regular Air Force in the grade of staff sergeant (E-5). Applicant’s RDP was 19 Jul 13. The process milestones in regards to applicant’s promotion cycle for 13E6 are provided below: - Promotion Eligibility Cutoff Date (PECD) for 13E6 promotion cycle was 31 Dec 12. - Promotion selections for 13E6 promotion cycle were made 16 Jul 13. - Request for Decoration Printout (RDP) 19 Jul 13. - Public release of promotion selections for 13E6 promotion cycle was on 1 Aug 13. On 14 Nov 13, the applicant was awarded the AFCM, for the period of performance from 2 Dec 08 to 15 Nov 11, with an RDP date of 19 Jul 13. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are included at Exhibits C, D, and E. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIDR recommends granting relief to change the RDP date and Given Under Hand date of the applicant’s 14 Nov 13 AFCM, indicating there is evidence of an error or injustice. Section 6249 of Title 10 United States Code directs a decoration be processed within three years and presented within five of the act, achievement, or service. While the applicant’s award meets these criteria, he has demonstrated there were processing delays beyond his control. To substantiate this claim, he has provided sufficient evidence of his personal diligence and supporting statements by his former supervisor and unit commander, testifying how the error occurred. It is recommended the Board grant the applicant’s request and determine an appropriate RDP date and Given Under Hand date. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIDR evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOE recommends to deny the applicant’s request for the corrected AFCM be considered in the 13E6 promotion cycle, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. The policies regarding the approval of a decoration and the credit of a decoration for promotion purposes are two separate and distinct policies. AFI 36-2803, Air Force Awards and Decorations Program, states a decoration is considered to have been placed into official channels when the decoration recommendation is signed by the initiating official and indorsed by a higher official in the chain of command. In this case, the RDP, dated 19 Jul 13, does not meet the criteria for promotion credit because the request for decoration is after selections were made on 16 Jul 13. AFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion Program, dictates that before a decoration is credited for a specific promotion cycle (13E6 in this case), the close out date of the decoration must be on or before the Promotion Eligibility Cutoff Date (PECD), and the date of the RDP must be before the date of selections for the cycle in question. This policy was initiated 28 Feb 79 to specifically preclude personnel from subsequently submitting someone for a decoration with a retroactive decoration effective date so as to put them over the selection cutoff score. Exceptions to this policy are only considered when an airman can support a previous submission with documentation or statements including conclusive evidence that the recommendation was officially placed in military channels within the prescribed time limit and conclusive evidence the recommendation was not acted upon through loss or inadvertence. The applicant was considered but not select for promotion to technical sergeant (E-6) during promotion cycle 13E6. His score was 1.51 points below the cutoff score. Had the AFCM (worth three points) in question been part of his promotion record, he would have been a selectee for promotion, pending a favorable data verification check and the recommendation of his commander. After a review of the applicant’s circumstances, it is not conclusive the decoration was submitted prior to the PECD. Further, evidence does not support the applicant’s contention he began efforts to correct the error until after he was not selected for promotion in August 2013. To approve the applicant's request would not be fair or equitable to many others in the same situation who miss promotion selection by a narrow margin and are not entitled to have an "after the fact" decoration count in the promotion process. Additionally, if the RDP date and Under My Hand dates are changed, it would not automatically entitle the applicant to supplemental promotion consideration because the AFCM was not eligible for use in the promotion process at the time; the Board would have to direct the applicant be provided supplemental consideration for cycle 13E6, to include the AFCM. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPSOR would like to inform the Board the applicant’s Air Force Specialty Code of 1A0X1 was removed for Enlisted Retention Board (ERB) consideration in 2014; therefore, the applicant did not meet an ERB and was not considered for separation as he anticipated in his contentions. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit E. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 23 Dec 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit F). As of this date, no response has been received by this office. 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 an error or injustice with regards to changing the Under Hand Date of the applicant’s 14 Nov 13 Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM). After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s complete submission, we believe the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. We note the comments of AFPC/DPSIDR indicating relief should be granted because the applicant’s provided documentation of due diligence in following up on the status of his AFCM. However, The Board was not convinced the applicant submitted enough evidence to indicate why the processing of his AFCM is any different than any other individual’s end of tour medal which was not processed in a timely manner could have been; the fact he missed a promotion selection was not determined to be an injustice. Ultimately, the Board was not convinced there was an injustice great enough to warrant changing the Under Hand Date, and directing a supplemental promotion due to the length of time in processing the applicant’s AFCM. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2014-03240 in Executive Session on 21 May 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Mar 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSID, dated 15 Oct 14. Exhibit D. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 3 Nov 14. Exhibit E. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 4 Dec 14. Exhibit F. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Dec 14.