RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2016-01590

						COUNSEL:  

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His record, with his award of the Air Force Commendation Medal – second oak leaf cluster, given in Mar 16, be considered at the next Special Selection Board.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

After he was passed over for promotion in Spring 2015, he contacted his supervisor regarding eligibility for an award since his last decoration was dated Oct 11.  She acknowledged his request and stated she was completing submission of documents for a decoration; however, she was later replaced with a temporary supervisor and the processing of his decoration was never completed.

He contacted his supervisor’s permanent replacement regarding the decoration and his upcoming promotion board.  He was awarded the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM), 2nd Oak Leaf Cluster (2OLC) in Mar 16.  He is nearly certain the promotion board was never made aware of this decoration.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 17 Jul 08, the applicant initially entered the Air Force Reserve.

On 25 Aug 08, the applicant was placed on Extended Active Duty via Special Order AK-138, dated 25 Jul 08.

On 1 Oct 11, the applicant was furnished an Honorable discharge and credited with 3 years, 1 month, and 7 days active service.

On 1 Feb 16, the applicant was twice-passed over for promotion to Major.

On 1 Oct 16, the applicant was furnished an Honorable discharge from the Air Force Reserve.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, which is attached at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/PB recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice.

The applicant was considered for promotion by the Calendar Year 2016 (CY16) Air Force Reserve (AFR) Line of the Air Force – Judge Advocate (LAF-J) Major Promotion Selection Board, which convened on 1 Feb 16.  He was not selected by this board and, being twice-passed over, was given a separation date of 1 Oct 16, as required by Title 10, U.S.C., section 14505.

The applicant’s AFCM was awarded in Mar 16.  The medal was not in existence when the CY16 board met; therefore, could not have been viewed by the board.

The applicant is requesting another board consider his record.  There are two ways to have that happen:  grant the applicant a special selection board (SSB) in lieu of the CY16 board, or extend his Mandatory Separation Date (MSD) so his records, with the Mar 16 AFCM, can be presented to the CY17 AFR PR LAF-J Major Promotion Selection Board.

Granting an SSB is not a viable option.  If there is an error in any member’s record, they may be granted SSB consideration.  However, the applicant’s record contained no error—the medal had not been granted to the applicant as of the board date.

The applicant has not presented a case to extend his MSD.  He did not provide any information from his unit supporting an extension.  He did not provide any information proving the award date of the AFCM was unjust.  He did not provide any information from his unit regarding the processing time of the AFCM.  Without such information, it is not possible to determine the awarding authority’s intent.

A complete copy of the ARPC/PB evaluation is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant disputes the advisory opinion as it failed to take into account several important facts.

He did not receive his AFCM 2OLC until Mar 16 due to circumstances beyond his knowledge and control.  His supervisor informed him she was submitting him for a medal, that the citation was written, and she saw no problem with approval.  However, after his last email exchange with his supervisor, she was replaced, with the new, permanent supervisor, in Jan 16.

He learned, at that time, no one had followed up on the processing of his medal, and ultimately, it was not awarded until Mar 16.  It would be fundamentally unfair to not have a promotion board consider his full record under the circumstance outlined above.

A complete copy of the applicant’s rebuttal is at Exhibit E.

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.  We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission, to include information provided in rebuttal, in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion 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 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-2016-01590 in Executive Session on 11 Jul 17 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2016-01590 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Apr 16, w/atch.
	Exhibit B.  Excerpt from Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, ARPC/PB, dated 5 Jul 16, w/atch.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 22 Feb 17, w/atch.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant’s Rebuttal, dated 10 Mar 17,
  w/atch.

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), it is certified a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations regarding AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2016-01590, and the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.