.
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE MATTER OF:
DOCKET NUMBER: 97-00916
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
Lm 2 2 1997
Applicant requests that he receive the award of the Air Medal.
Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request
and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the
application be denied (Exhibit C) .
The advisory opinion was
forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D) .
As of this date, no response has been received by this office.
After careful consideration of applicant's request and the
available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of
error or injustice to warrant corrective action. The facts and
opinions stated in the advisory opinion appear to be based on the
evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant.
Absent persuasive evidence applicant was denied rights to which
entitled, appropriate regulations were not followed, or
appropriate standards were not applied, we find no basis to
disturb the existing record.
Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.
The Board staff is directed to inform applicant of this decision.
Applicant should also be informed that this decision is final and
will only be reconsidered upon the presentation of new relevant
evidence which was not reasonably available at the time the
application was filed.
Members of the Board Mr. Henry C. Saunders, Mr. Allen Beckett,
and Mr. Richard A. Peterson considered this application on 16 Oct
97, in accordance with the provisions of Air For
Instruction
36-2603 and the governing statute, 10 U 8 . C . 1 5 5 2 7
Exhibits :
A. Applicant's DD Form 149
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. Advisory Opinion
D. AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
H E A D Q U A R T E R S A I R F O R C E P E R S O N N E L C E N T E R
R A N D O L P H A I R F O R C E B A S E T E X A S
MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR
FROM: HQ AFPCDPPPRA
550 C Street West Ste 12
Randolph AFB TX 78 150-47 14
17 June 1997
SUBJECT: Atmlication for Correction of Militarv Records (DD Form 149)
1. REQUESTED ACTION. Applicant requests award of the Air Medal.
2. BASIS FOR REQUEST. Applicant states he participated in combat flight missions 13 Dec
41-4 Mar 42 in the Asiatic-Pacific Theater of Operations.
3. FACTS.
c
a. Applicant’s records were destroyed in the 1973 fire at the National Personnel Records
Center. Although requested, he did not fbrnish a copy of his Report of Separation. He did fur-
nish copies of the citations for a Bronze Star Medal and the First Oak Leaf Cluster.
’ b. Applicant attended a reunion of the#Fighter
Squadron# Air Force in 1993.
c. The Air Medal is awarded for meritorious achievement while participating in aerial
flight ...” and “...must be accomplished with distinction above and beyond that expected of pro-
fessional airmen.”
d. The few documents the applicant provided indicate that he was a Flight Surgeon with the
U.S. Army. He provides no documentation to show that he was ever recommended in writing for
award of the Air Medal.
4. DISCUSSION. The applicant has not provided any documentation to verify that he is eligible
for or entitled to the Air Medal. He has not provided any documentation regarding his service
that can be used to verify his claim, especially his Report of Separation. Without any records
and/or his Report of Separation, we can not verify his eligibility for or entitlement to any awards
or decorations.
5. RECOMMENDATION.
We recommend disapproval of the applicant’s request for award of the Air Medal.
FOR THE COMMANDER
GEORGTA A. WISE, DAFC
Recognition Programs Branch
Promotions, Eva1 & Recognition Div
J AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 97-01394 , COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: my 2 2 1997 Applicant requests that he be given special selection board (SSB) consideration by an unnamed central lieutenant colonel selection board with a corrected 28 Aug 96 officer performance report (OPR) and a pending decoration included in his officer selection record (OSR). The appropriate Air Force off ices evaluated applicant I s...
However, the evidence provided has established to our satisfaction that the applicant‘s service during the period in question did warrant recognition by award of the Air Medal and that the recommendation for this award was submitted and lost. RECOMMENDATION. We recommend disapproval of the applicant’s request for award of the Distinguished Flying Cross for 15 Jul45 and the Air Medal for Mar 45-Jul45 and Jun 45-Sep 45.
1 The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The applicant’s records were forwarded to the appropriate office to have those awards and decorations to which he is entitled added to his DD Form 214. We recommend disapproval of the applicant’s request for the Air Force Longevity Service Award and Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon to be added to his DD Form 214.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). (2) Applicant has not submitted any documentation to substantiate his claim that he re- submitted a recommendation for the Air Medal or a request for reconsideration to upgrade the Aerial Achievement Medal to the Air Medal, or any responses to such submissions. We recommend disapproval of the applicant’s request for his Aerial...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). (2) Applicant has not submitted any documentation to substantiate his claim that he re- submitted a recommendation for the Air Medal or a request for reconsideration to upgrade the Aerial Achievement Medal to the Air Medal, or any responses to such submissions. We recommend disapproval of the applicant’s request for his Aerial...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C ) . The applicant is requesting several actions we will address the one requesting the Board restore him to the rank of Airman Second Class. - Based upon the information provided we are forwarding this application for correction of military records without recommendation.
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-01806 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: NO Form 214 (Certificate of be corrected to show his listed and the Vietnam Release Vietnam Service Applicant requests that his DD or Discharge From Active Duty) service dates and all schools Medal. The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board- -recommending the application be denied...
They further state the citations for the award of the MSM, DMSM, and DMSM, 1OLC the applicant claim were missing from his OSR when he was considered for promotion by the CY97B board were filed in his OSR when his records met the board in December -. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and states that the basis of his request for SSB consideration is the result of an unfair review...
After his return tc the United States, he inquired about a request for the 30LC ana was promptly informed t h a t the Replacement Depot had no authority to initiate such a request and since he was being processed f o r release from active duty, there was no way such a request could be considered. It is no longer possible to ascertain whether or not the applicant was eligible for an additional decoratiorA for aerial achievements. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and...
-...I The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). c. On 14 Jul98, the applicant was again requested to provide a copy of the recommendation package, with a copy of the DECOR-6, and informing him it was the applicant’s responsibility to h i s h all documentation to substantiate his claim.