RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-04002

   						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS:

1.  His Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) awarded in 2004 be entered into his selection folder, and be included in the promotion selection process for promotion to Master Sergeant (MSgt).

2.  His skill level in his duty history be corrected.  (Administratively corrected) 

APPLICANT CONTENDS:

1.  He was awarded the AFCM on 6 Dec 04, but it was not properly updated in his selection folder.  

2.  His duty history in his selection folder incorrectly showed a downgrade in his skill level from a 7-level to a 5-level, and then back to a 7-level.  He never had a reduction in skill level. 

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant serves in the Regular Air Force in the grade of Technical Sergeant (TSgt).

On 12 Aug 16, AFPC Airman Assignments corrected the applicant’s duty history so his Duty Air Force Specialty Codes (DAFSCs) reflected the correct skill levels.  

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPRs), which are attached at Exhibits C and D.    

AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

AFPC/DP3SP recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice.  A review of the applicant’s official military personnel records reveals the AFCM in question is properly recorded in his record.  No further action is required. 

A complete copy of the AFPC/DP3SP evaluation is at Exhibit C.

The AFPC Enlisted Promotions Office recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice.  All members eligible for promotion consideration also receive and/or have access to the Enlisted Promotion Program Fact Sheet.  This document specifically states:  IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO VERIFY ALL DATA ON YOUR DVR IS CORRECT:  Along with reviewing the DVR, you should review the Automated Records Management System (ARMS) to ensure data is correct and all appropriate documents are filed accordingly.  If you detect an error on your DVR, contact the appropriate MPS work center for assistance.  

The applicant requests his AFCM from 2004 be included in his promotion process for his promotion to MSgt, but he does not specify which promotion cycle.  The AFCM was on file and considered by the CY16E7 (MSgt) Senior Noncommissioned Officer Selection Board, so it is assumed the applicant is asking about the CY15E7 promotion cycle.  He has received the 3 weighted points for the AFCM for all past cycles; however, beginning with cycle 2015, E-7 eligible records are evaluated by a board and receive a board score in addition to the weighted points and test score(s).  The applicant was considered and non-selected for promotion to MSgt during cycle 15E7 without the hard copy AFCM in his promotion record.  He received 16.00 weighted decoration points, a board score of 345.00, and a total score of 544.11.  The total score required for selection in his AFSC was 567.49.  The applicant was also considered and non-selected for promotion to MSgt during cycle 16E7 with the hard copy AFCM in his promotion record.  He received 16.00 weighted decoration points, a board score of 300.00, and a total score of 486.54.  The total score required for selection in his AFSC was 528.48.  

It is ultimately the member’s responsibility to verify their data and identify any discrepancies prior to selects being run (in this case, 30 Jun 15).  Eligibles are given a copy of the information that will be used in the promotion process when they are notified of their testing date (approximately 4-6 months before the selection process).  It is their responsibility at that time to identify any errors and have them corrected.  In the applicant’s case, the AFCM had been updated in MilPDS since 2004 and used in the promotion process 9 times (4 to TSgt and 5 to MSgt).  

The applicant has been aware of the decoration since 2004, yet he did not take corrective action to ensure his decoration was properly filed in his record until almost 12 years after it was awarded.  Therefore, they recommend denial of his request to use the AFCM in the promotion process for cycle 15E7.

A complete copy of the AFPC Enlisted Promotions Office evaluation is at Exhibit D.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 24 Aug 16 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E).  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES:

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.  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 AFPC/DP3SP and the AFPC Enlisted Promotions Office and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief.

THE BOARD DETERMINES:

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-2015-04002 in Executive Session on 15 Nov 16 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-04002 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 3 Sep 15.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DP3SP, dated 12 Jun 16.
Exhibit D.  Memorandum, The AFPC Enlisted Promotions Office, dated 17 Aug 16.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Aug 16.

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), it is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.