Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002180
Original file (0002180.doc) Auto-classification: Denied





                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  00-02180
            INDEX CODE:  100.00, 107.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

Applicant requests that his DD Form 214s (Report of Separation  From
Active Duty)/(Armed Forces of the United States Report  of  Transfer
or Discharge) be corrected to reflect his  service  in  Vietnam  and
additional awards.  Applicant's submission is at Exhibit A.

The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's requests  and
provided an advisory opinion to the  Board  recommending  denial  of
applicant’s request for the Presidential Unit Citation  (Exhibit C).
The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for  review  and
response (Exhibit D).  Applicant's response to the advisory  opinion
is at Exhibit E.

We note that the corrective actions  the  applicant  requested  have
been resolved through pertinent administrative procedures  and  have
been added to his DD Form 214s and he has been issued DD  Form  215s
(Correction to DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge From
Active Duty).

Regarding applicant’s request for award  of  the  Presidential  Unit
Citation, after reviewing the documentation submitted, the Board  is
convinced  he  was  assigned  to  Detachment  15  at  the  time  the
Presidential Unit Citation  was  awarded  (2 Jun  67 -  31 Mar  69).
However, after checking with officials in  the  Recognition  Program
Branch, it appears that since applicant  was  in  a  temporary  duty
(TDY) status rather than a permanent status, he does not qualify for
the Presidential Unit Citation.  In view of the foregoing and in the
absence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend the applicant
be awarded the Presidential Unit Citation.

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 available at the  time  the  application  was
filed.









Members of the Board Mr. Teddy L. Houston, Mr. John L.  Robuck,  and
Mr. Edward H. Parker considered this application on  8 May  2001  in
accordance with the provisions of Air Force Instruction 36-2603, and
the governing statute, 10, U.S.C. 1552.



                                        TEDDY L. HOUSTON
                                  Panel Chair
Exhibits:

A.  Applicant's DD Form 149
B.  Available Master Personnel Records
C.  Advisory Opinion
D.  AFBCMR Ltr Forwarding Advisory Opinion
E.  Applicant's Response

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9903236

    Original file (9903236.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002486

    Original file (0002486.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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, within 30 days (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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002472

    Original file (0002472.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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). The facts and opinions stated in the advisory opinions appear to be based on the evidence of record and have not been rebutted by applicant.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 0002404

    Original file (0002404.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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). Accordingly, applicant's request is denied.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0101059

    Original file (0101059.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0003136

    Original file (0003136.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). 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. We noted that consequent to a similar request submitted by the applicant in 1983, orders were...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002139

    Original file (0002139.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 0001991

    Original file (0001991.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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). 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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0100278

    Original file (0100278.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0100317

    Original file (0100317.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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). 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.