RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  98-00753
                 INDEX CODE:  107

                 COUNSEL:  NONE

                 HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of  Transfer
or   Discharge,   be   corrected    by    adding    the    appropriate
awards/decorations as follows:

     Add the Air Force Good Conduct Medal (AFGCM)
     Add  the  Presidential  Unit  Citation  (PUC)  (Security   Police
Squadron)
     Change the Service Medal) with 1 Bronze  Service  Star  to  read:
“Service Medal with “2” Bronze Service Stars”
     Add “1” Bronze Service Star to the Small Arms Expert Marksmanship
Ribbon (SAEMR)

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He believes he is entitled to the Air Force Good Conduct Medal and the
Presidential Unit Citation.  In addition, the DD Form 214 reflects the
with 1 Bronze Service Star and it  should  include  2  Bronze  Service
Stars.  He may also be entitled to a bronze star device on  his  Small
Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon as he qualified expert with both the M-
16 rifle and the .38 caliber handgun.

Applicant’s submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from  the
applicant's military records, are contained in the letter prepared  by
the  appropriate  office  of  the  Air   Force   Office   of   Primary
Responsibility (OPR).  Accordingly, there is no need to  recite  these
facts in this Record of Proceedings.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Recognition Programs Branch, Promotions, Evaluation &  Recognition
Division,  HQ  AFPC/DPPPRA,  state   that   although   there   is   no
documentation to deny award of the AFGCM, there  is  no  documentation
reflecting the applicant’s service in (last assignment) or that he was
recommended  for  this  award.   Without  confirmation  that  he   was
recommended for this award and documentation showing the level of  his
performance, they cannot verify his eligibility.

The applicant was assigned to the  Air Police Squadron  (APS).   Since
he was not assigned to the  Security Police Squadron, that earned  the
Presidential Unit  Citation,  he  is  not  eligible  for  this  award.
However, the applicant is entitled to the Gallantry Cross  with  Palm,
earned by the APS.  This award should be added to his DD Form 214.

Applicant was assigned to the 3Combat Support  Group  (CSG),  not  the
Headquarters, during 23 Apr 66 - 9 Oct 66, and to the APS 10 Oct 66  -
9 Feb 67.  The   CSG did not earn any unit awards or campaign  credit,
applicant is not eligible for any unit award or campaign  credit  from
this unit.

The APS earned one bronze service star as campaign credit while he was
assigned to that unit.  Therefore,  the  entry  on  his  DD  Form  214
(w/1BSS), is correct.   His  eligibility  for  any  additional  bronze
service stars to the cannot be verified.

The applicant did not provide any documentation  to  substantiate  his
claim for a bronze service star to be added to the Small  Arms  Expert
Marksmanship Ribbon (SAEMR), and there is nothing in  his  records  to
indicate Expert qualification with two weapons.  His  eligibility  for
an additional award of the SAEMR cannot be verified.

Applicant did not serve four years in order  to  wear  the  Air  Force
Longevity Service Award (AFLSA); therefore, it should  not  have  been
reflected on his DD Form 214.

HQ AFPC/DPPPRA recommends disapproval of the  AFGCM,  PUC,  additional
bronze service star to the VSM, and the bronze  service  star  to  the
SAEMR.  They also recommend deletion of the AFLSA  from  the  DD  Form
214.

They do recommend approval to add the Gallantry Cross with Palm to the
applicant’s DD Form 214.

A copy of the Air Force evaluation, with attachments, is  attached  at
Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant submitted a response to the Air Force evaluation and states,
in summary, that the records he has support his case for the award  of
certain ribbons and medals for his period of service.

A copy of the applicant’s response, with attachments, is  attached  at
Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Chief, Awards and Decorations Section,  Promotion,  Evaluation,  &
Recognition Division, HQ AFPC/DPPPR, reviewed  applicant’s  additional
documentation submitted in rebuttal to the prior advisory  from  their
office.

With regard to the award of the Air Force Good Conduct Medal  (AFGCM),
the applicant’s DD Form  7,  “Airman  Military  Record”  reflects  two
periods which are creditable for the AFGCM; 28 Feb-6 Apr 63 and 6  Apr
- 13 Jun 63.  There is no documentation indicating he was  recommended
for, or awarded the AFGCM and he does not provide  a  copy  of  orders
awarding him this medal.

Applicant provided a copy of  the  lineage  of  the   Security  Police
Squadron, showing that it was originally activated as the  Air  Police
Squadron, and redesignated the  Security Police  Squadron  on  15  May
1967.

HQ AFPC/DPPPR has verified the applicant’s entitlement to:

    Two bronze stars to the  Service Medal.

    Republic of  Gallantry Cross with Palm.

    Presidential Unit Citation

    Air Force Outstanding Unit Award with V.

His records have been  administratively  corrected  to  reflect  these
awards.  However, there is no documentation in the applicant’s records
showing he was awarded the Air Force Good Conduct Medal  or  a  bronze
service star to the Small Arms Expert  Marksmanship  Ribbon,  and  the
applicant has not provided any documentation to show either  of  these
were awarded.   Therefore,  entitlement  to  either  award  cannot  be
verified and denial is recommended.

HQ AFPC/DPPPR forwarded a copy of the corrections to the applicant  on
19 February 1999.  (Copy attached).

A copy of the additional Air Force evaluation,  with  attachments,  is
attached at Exhibit G.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the additional Air Force evaluation, with  attachments,  was
forwarded to the applicant on 8 March 1999  for  review  and  response
within 30 days.  Applicant responded  to  the  AFBCMR  by  E-Mail  and
stated that he did not know it was his responsibility  to  submit  his
own orders for the Good Conduct Medal.  He stated that he did write to
the Record Center for his medals and was sent  an  Army  Good  Conduct
Medal.  He believes he should be awarded the Air  Force  Good  Conduct
Medal.

A copy of applicant’s response is attached at Exhibit I.

_________________________________________________________________

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 probable error or injustice.  After a thorough review
of the evidence of record  and  applicant’s  submission,  we  are  not
persuaded that he should be receive the Bronze  Service  Star  to  the
Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon (SAEMR) or the award of the  Air
Force Good Conduct Medal (AFGCM).  His  contentions  are  duly  noted;
however, we do not  find  these  assertions,  in  and  by  themselves,
sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the  Air
Force.  On reaching these conclusions, we considered the following:

    a.  With regard to the SAEMR, there is no  official  documentation
in his record that he was awarded the bronze service star to the SAEMR
nor is there documentation to support his contention that he qualified
as expert with two weapons.

    b.  There is also no documentation to show that he was awarded, or
either entitled to the award of the AFGCM.  We note  that  there  were
two short periods of service that were creditable for the award of the
AFGCM; however, according  to  regulation,  completion  of  continuous
active service for  three  years  was  required.   Applicant  did  not
provide documentation that he  was  recommended  for  the  AFGCM.   We
therefore agree with the recommendations of the Air  Force  and  adopt
the rationale expressed  as  the  basis  for  our  decision  that  the
applicant has failed to sustain his burden that he has suffered either
an error or an injustice.  Therefore, we find no compelling  basis  to
recommend granting the relief sought for the SAEMR or the AFGCM.

4.  With  respect  to  the  applicant’s  requests   to   receive   the
Presidential Unit Citation (PUC) ( Security Police Squadron)  and  the
Service Medal   with  “2”  Bronze  Service  Stars,  we  note  that  HQ
AFPC/DPPPR verified that the applicant was entitled to  these  awards.
They also found that he was entitled to the  Gallantry Cross with Palm
and the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award  with  “V.”   Therefore,  the
applicant’s DD Form 214  was  administratively  corrected  to  reflect
these awards.  HQ AFPC/DPPPR also deleted the award of the  Air  Force
Longevity Service Award (AFLSA).  The criteria to receive  this  award
is an aggregate of four (4) years active service and  the  applicant’s
total military service was 3 years, 11 months and 16 days.  Therefore,
he did not meet  that  criteria.   Applicant  was  notified  of  these
corrections on 19 February 1999.

_______________________________________________________________________
_____________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of probable  material  error  or  injustice;
that the application was denied without  a  personal  appearance;  and
that 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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 3 December 1998  and  12  July  1999,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603.

                  Mrs. Barbara A. Westgate, Panel Chair
                  Ms. Rita J. Maldonado, Member
                  Dr. Gerald B. Kauvar, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Mar 98, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPRA, dated 27 Mar 98, w/atchs.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 13 Apr 98.
   Exhibit E.  Applicant’s Letter, dated 30 Apr 98, w/atchs.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 26 Jan 99.
   Exhibit G.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPR, dated 2 Feb 99, w/atchs.
   Exhibit H.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 8 Mar 99.
   Exhibit I.  Applicant’s E-Mail.


                                   BARBARA A. WESTGATE
                                   Panel Chair