RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2019-04470

XXXXXXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL: NONE	 

  	HEARING REQUESTED: NO

APPLICANT’S REQUEST

She be awarded the Air Force Commendation Medal for the inclusive period of 4 Apr 13 to 31 Jul 16.  

APPLICANT’S CONTENTIONS

She would have been awarded an Air Force Commendation Medal upon her first Permanent Change of Station (PCS) in 2016 had the negative instances not occurred.  On 26 Dec 18, AFPC approved her Evaluation Reports Appeal Board (ERAB) application for removal of her 2016 Enlisted Performance Report (EPR).  She was advised by the evaluations office she could submit a decoration package to her previous squadron for reconsideration for an award.  On 1 Mar 19, she submitted the documents but received no response.  

She understands her previous station does not have to award her a decoration; however, they have not provided her a proper response.  Additionally, if an evaluation was appealed because it was related to incidents of questionable legality, morality, reprisal and was unjust, then a request for an award is warranted and should be approved.  Had she received an Air Force Commendation Medal in 2016, she would have been selected for promotion to the grade of technical sergeant (E-6) in 2017.  She requests the Board consider awarding her an Air Force Commendation Medal.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant is a staff sergeant (E-5) in the Regular Air Force.  

On 26 Dec 18, the ERAB approved the applicant’s request to void her EPR for the 1 Feb 15 to 31 Jan 16 reporting period.  The EPR was replaced with an AF Form 77, Letter of Evaluation, stating she was not rated for the above period and she received a promotion recommendation of “Promote.”  

In a letter to her former commander dated 28 Feb 19, she requested reconsideration for award of the Air Force Commendation Medal.  She states she was issued a Letter of Counseling for refusing to carry out an order that was illegal and unethical and as a result she was reprised against.  Her ERAB application was approved on 26 Dec 18 and she received supplemental promotion consideration for promotion to the grade of E-6.  She missed promotion to the grade of E-6 by three points for the 2017 Cycle.  She is positive she would have been awarded a PCS decoration had the wrongdoing not occurred.  

The applicant was awarded an Air Force Achievement Medal, First Oak Leaf Cluster for outstanding achievement with inclusive dates 26 Nov 15 to 1 Jul 16 for her deployment but did not receive a meritorious service PCS award for the period of 4 Apr 13 to 31 Jul 16.  For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisory at Exhibit C.

APPLICABLE AUTHORITY

AFMAN 36-2803, Awards and Memorialization Program.  Decorations for meritorious service are awarded for individual performance that exceeds that expected by virtue of grade and experience, based on accomplishments during an entire tour of duty.  

The Air Force Commendation Medal is awarded to members who distinguished themselves by meritorious achievement and service.  The degree of merit must be distinctive, though it need not be unique.  

AIR FORCE EVALUATION

AFPC Recognition Team informed the applicant on 31 Dec 18, they reviewed her application to the Board for possible administrative relief but were unable to verify award of the Air Force Commendation Medal with one Bronze Oak Leaf Cluster.  In order to reasonably consider her request, she would need to submit a complete decoration package to include a signed recommendation from someone with first-hand knowledge of the act/achievement, eyewitness statements, and a proposed citation signed by the recommending official.  If additional documents are not received within 30 days, her case would be referred back to the Board for adjudication.  The complete advisory opinion is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION

In an e-mail dated 14 Feb 20, the applicant advised she was in receipt of the AFPC Recognition Memorandum.  She provides e-mail communiqué with her former unit and a draft decoration package, to include a recommendation for decoration, a character statement from a master sergeant (E-7), a witness statement from a contractor and other supporting documentation.  The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibits D, E and F.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

1.  The application was timely filed.

2.  The applicant exhausted all available non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.   After reviewing all Exhibits, the Board concludes the applicant is not the victim of an error or injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of the AFPC Recognition Team and finds a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  In this respect, the Board notes the applicant did not provide a complete decoration package as requested by AFPC.  Further, the Board notes the applicant provided insufficient evidence to show she was not considered for a decoration because of the removed EPR.  The applicant also contends she would have received an Air Force Commendation Medal had it not been for the unjust EPR; however, she has provided insufficient evidence to persuade the Board this to be the case.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

RECOMMENDATION

The Board recommends informing the applicant the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice, and the Board will reconsider the application only upon receipt of relevant evidence not already presented.

CERTIFICATION

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2019-04470 in Executive Session on 28 May 20:

 , Panel Chair
 , Panel Member
 , Panel Member

All members voted against correcting the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 27 Aug 19.  
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion, AFPC Recognition Team, dated 31 Dec 19.  
Exhibit D: Applicant’s response, w/atchs, dated 21 Jan 20.  
Exhibit E:	Applicant’s response, w/atchs, dated 23 Jan 20.
Exhibit F:  Applicant’s response, w/atchs, dated 30 Jan 20.  

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings, as required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.