RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 99-01520
INDEX NUMBER: 107.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
Applicant requests that he be awarded the Airman’s Medal for an
event that occurred in November 1962. 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.
Specifically, without information from the members of the
applicant’s former chain of command, we do not find the
uncorroborated statements of the applicant and the former Utilities
Officer and Interim Commander provide an adequate basis that his
actions did, in fact, meet the criteria for the award of the
Airman’s Medal or that if a recommendation had been submitted in a
timely manner, it would have been approved. Accordingly, we find
no basis to disturb the existing record.
Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.
The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been
shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will
materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.
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, Messrs. Henry Romo Jr., Patrick R. Wheeler,
and Laurence M. Groner, considered this application on 21 October
1999, in accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-
2603 and the governing statute, 10 U.S.C. 1552.
HENRY ROMO
JR.
Panel
Chair
Exhibits:
A. Applicant's DD Form 149
B. Available Master Personnel Records
C. Advisory Opinion
D. SAF/MIBR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
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 response to the advisory opinion is at Exhibit E 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. HENRY ROMO JR. Panel Chair Exhibits: 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 opinions was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). 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 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). 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 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). 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 appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant for review and response, within 30 days (Exhibit D). The applicant’s response to the advisory opinion is at Exhibit E. After careful consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant...
The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). Applicant's response to the advisory opinions is at Exhibit E. 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 appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit B). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit C). 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 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 and counsel for review and response (Exhibit D). 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 appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit B). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit C). 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 appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinions were forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). Applicant's response to the advisory opinions is at Exhibit E. 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.