RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-02218
INDEX CODE: 107.00
APPLICANT COUNSEL: None
SSN HEARING DESIRED: No
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
She be awarded the Air Medal for the combat missions she flew in
support of Operation DESERT STORM.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The award package was misplaced and never awarded.
In support of her application she submits a letter of recommendation,
documentation of sorties and copy of the original package.
Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
During the time period in question the applicant, a Reservist, served
on active duty from 25 Jan 91-21 May 91. She served in support of
Operation Desert Shield/Storm and was in the area of responsibility
from 9 Feb 91 to 19 Apr 91.
She was released from active duty on 21 May 91 and transferred to the
Reserve of the Air Force in the grade of lieutenant colonel.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Chief, Awards and Decorations Section, HQ AFPC/DPPPR, reviewed
this application and states the applicant has not provided any
documentation showing a written recommendation was submitted into
official channels. Nor has she provided a narrative justification
showing she met the criteria for award of the Air Medal for heroism.
The applicant has not provided
documentation showing she tried to correct this administratively prior
to her retirement. There is no evidence to show that the applicant
submitted a recommendation package through congressional channels as
suggested. The Centaf Guide for awards and decorations requires 20
combat flight missions, and the applicant did not meet that
requirement. Based on the evidence provided they recommend
disapproving the applicant’s request for award of the Air Medal.
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states the award
she is requesting is the Air Medal as requested on her DD Form 149 and
in the recommendation letter from Brigadier General Gingerich. It is
not for heroism.
She states the Air Medal is awarded for 20 combat support missions
flown within the Area of Responsibility on or after 17 Jan 91
through the termination of hostilities. As an exception to policy,
individuals may be recommended for the initial award of the Air Medal
with less than the minimum provided the individual departs the Area of
Responsibility prior to meeting the minimums. She submitted Air Forms
Aircrew/Mission Flight Data Document, AFTO Form 781, which show the
recorded flights she participated in between 2 Mar 91 and 15 Apr 91.
The copies of the forms indicated she flew on 22 combat support
missions and are signed and certified by the pilots of those missions.
The applicant states that in the Fall of 1991 that written and signed
documentation to award her the Air Medal was forwarded from O’Hare
ARFF through channels to HQ US Central Command Air Forces (CENTAF).
This award package along with several others was either misplaced or
lost in the system. The award package was reaccomplished in 1992 and
again forwarded from O’Hare ARFF addressed to CENTAF and again it was
misplaced or lost in the system. She attached a copy of the Citation
to accompany the award of the Air Medal that was submitted in 1991 and
1992. She failed to keep a copy of the other paperwork.
The Air Medal nomination packets were resubmitted to HQ ACC for
approval on 13 Mar 95. She also has attached a letter from Col M.S.
who was the commander of the 928 AES (formerly the 63 AES) in 1995
stating that the applicant was inadvertently omitted from
list of names submitted for the award of the Air Medal. Col M.S’s.
letter states the member does qualify for the Air Medal and that she
has flown on 22 combat support missions.
Applicant’s response, with attachments, is attached 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. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of probable error or injustice warranting the award of
the Air Medal. After reviewing the supporting documentation
submitted, we believe that the applicant did, in fact, meet the
criteria for the award of the Air Medal for the combat missions she
flew in support of Operation Desert Storm. In support of her claim
the applicant submitted letters signed by the former Commander of the
xxxx Tactical Airlift Group and Colonel S., USAFR, Nurse Corps, IMA,
Office of the Surgeon General stating that the applicant was indeed
recommended for the Air Medal and that she was inadvertently omitted
from the submittal listing. The applicant also submitted signed and
certified AFORMS AIRCREW/MISSION FLIGHT DATA DOCUMENTs verifying the
actual number of missions she flew in support of Operation Desert
Storm. With no reason to question the veracity of these statements
and documents, we believe any doubt should be resolved in favor of the
applicant. Therefore, we recommend granting the applicant’s request.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that she was awarded the
Air Medal for the period 9 February 1991 through 11 April 1991 for
meritorious achievement while participating in sustained aerial flight
in support of Operation DESERT STORM.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in
Executive Session on 6 December 2000, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Teddy L. Houston, Panel Chair
Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Member
Ms. Diana Arnold, Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The
following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 Jul 00, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Officer Selection Folder.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPR, dated 31 Aug 00, w/atch.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 15 Sep 00.
Exhibit E. Applicant’s Response, dated 8 Oct 00.
TEDDY L. HOUSTON
Panel Chair
AFBCMR 00-02218
INDEX CODE: 107.00
MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF
Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air
Force Board for Correction for Military Records and under the authority
of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116) it is
directed that:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT, SSN, be corrected to show that she was awarded
the Air Medal for the period 9 February 1991 through 11 April 1991 for
meritorious achievement while participating in sustained aerial flight
in support of Operation DESERT STORM.
JOE G. LINEBERGER
Director
Air Force Review Boards Agency
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01164
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS (KLM-K). Kuwait Liberation Medal-Kuwait DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01164 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His official records be corrected to show he was awarded: 1. Therefore, we recommend his records be corrected as indicate below.
While his case file reflects a recommendation package for the award of the BSM was submitted on 6 December 1991, the final decision was not to award him for this decoration. The recommendation package is a recommendation only; the decision to approve or disapprove such a recommendation rests with a award approving authority. Other than his own assertions, the applicant has not provided evidence which was unavailable during the processing of the award recommendation.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02218
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Applicant’s available military personnel records indicate that he enlisted in the Army of the United States (AUS) on 12 Mar 44 in the grade of private. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR recommended denial indicating that after 1944, the DFC and Air Medal were no longer awarded automatically, based on the number of combat missions flown, but a...
Other 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 at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR reviewed this application and recommended denial. Therefore, based on the evidence of record, we believe it is reasonable to assume that the applicant did perform service in direct support of...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05324
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05324 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Air Medal (AM), dated 30 October 2012 be changed to reflect a date prior to 8 June 2009. While it is noted there were significant delays in between when the act occurred and when the applicant received award of the AM, no documentation has been presented demonstrating a recommendation package for the AM was...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-03583
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-03583 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE: 12 FEBRUARY 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Air Medal (AM) awarded on 17 Aug 2004 for heroism be upgraded to the Distinguished Flying Cross with Valor (DFC w/V). The Chief of Staff of the Air Force strongly believed another...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01377
To be eligible, a service member must be: 1) attached to or regularly serving for one of more days with an organization participating in ground and/or shore (military) operations, 2) attached to or regularly serving for one or more days aboard a navy vessel directly supporting military operations, 3) actually participating as a crew member in one or more aerial flights directly supporting military operations in the areas of responsibility, 4) serving on temporary duty (TDY) for 30...
The applicant provided a rebuttal dated 23 Feb 99. Based on the applicant’s appeal and at the request of HQ AFMC/DO, HQ AFMC/JA performed another legal review on 12 Mar 99 and concluded that the FEB findings and recommendations were legally sufficient and recommended denial of the applicant’s request for a new FEB. A review of the FEB transcripts and exhibits by HQ AFMC/JA shows no reason to believe that the board did not properly weigh all testimony presented in this case.
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...