RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03009 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

He be awarded the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (AFEM). 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

While stationed at RAF Lakenheath, England, from 3 Aug 61 to 
8 Apr 64, he supported the Cuban Missile Crisis and should have 
been awarded the AFEM. He was involved in decrypting top secret 
messages to assist jets and was not aware that the AFEM was 
awarded to members who supported the Cuban Missile Crisis. In 
addition, he recently read an article that a sailor was awarded 
the AFEM for his support of the Cuban Missile Crisis. 

 

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal 
statement; a copy of his DD Form 214, Report of Transfer or 
Discharge, issued in conjunction with his 12 Feb 65 separation, 
and a portion of his AF Form 7, Airman Military Record. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant entered active duty on 14 Feb 61 and was 
progressively promoted to the grade of airman first class 
(A1C/E-4). 

 

He was honorably released from active duty under the provisions 
of AFR 39-14, on 12 Feb 65, and transferred to the Air Force 
Reserve. He was credited with 3 years, 11 months, and 29 days 
of active duty service, including 2 years, 8 months, and 6 days 
of foreign service. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 


AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial, stating, in part, that no 
official documentation (travel voucher, travel orders, 
decorations, etc.) was located in the applicant’s record that 
verifies the applicant served or deployed with “boots on ground” 
in Cuba. 

 

The complete AFPC/DPSIDR evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The applicant notes the incorrect date of “14 Feb 67,” in the 
advisory opinion, that was reflected as the date he entered 
active duty. He further explains that while he did support the 
Cuban Missile Crisis he did not have “boots on ground” in Cuba, 
but, felt that being overseas and supporting the crisis would 
make him eligible. 

 

The applicant’s complete response 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 not timely filed; however, it is in the 
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 

 

3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of 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 the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) and 
adopt its rationale as the primary basis for our conclusion that 
the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. 
We note the error made in the OPR’s opinion regarding the date 
the applicant entered active duty; however, since it has no 
bearing on the applicant’s qualification for the AFEM, we 
consider it a harmless error. We appreciate the applicant’s 
service to the Nation, but find he does not meet the requirement 
for award of the AFEM for support of the Cuban Missile Crisis. 
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find 
no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this 
application. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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-2010-03009 in Executive Session on 7 April 2011, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 9 Aug 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIDR, dated 15 Oct 10. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 29 Oct 10. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 5 Nov 10. 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair