RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-03274
INDEX CODE: 107.00
APPLICANT COUNSEL: NY State Div of Vet
Affairs
SSN HEARING DESIRED: No
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His DD Form 214 be corrected to reflect he received the M16 Marksman
Ribbon while in basic training.
Block 15b on the DD Form 214 be corrected to show that he is a high
school graduate.
EXAMINER'S NOTE: AFPC/DPPRSP administratively corrected Block 15b of
the DD Form 214.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The reasons the applicant believes the records to be in error or
unjust and the evidence submitted in support of the appeal are at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the regular Air Force on 19 Jan 95 for a
period of 4 years. He was honorably discharged on 8 Nov 97 for
unsatisfactory performance. He served 2 years, 9 months and 20 days
of active duty service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPPR informed the applicant that no ribbon was awarded for
qualifying as a Marksman, there was a ribbon awarded for qualifying as
an Expert, and the ribbon is the Small Arms Expert Marksmanship
Ribbon. DPPPR requested that the applicant provide Air Force Form
522, which would show his qualification on the
firing range, or an order awarding him the Small Arms Expert
Marksmanship Ribbon. The applicant has not responded to the request.
DPPPR further states that without documentation showing he was
qualified as an Expert on the firing range, they can not verify his
eligibility for the ribbon. They recommend denying the requested
relief.
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant on 15 Mar 02, for review and response. As of this date, no
response has been received by this office.
_________________________________________________________________
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 an error or injustice. The applicant's contentions
are duly noted; however, we do not find his contentions in and by
themselves, sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided
by the Air Force. The applicant was requested to provide verification
showing his qualification on the firing range or an order awarding him
the ribbon. He did not respond. Unless the applicant provides the
necessary documentation to prove he qualified on the firing range, a
determination cannot be made in regard to his eligibility for the
ribbon. 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 of having suffered
either an error or an injustice. Therefore, in the absence of
evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend
granting the relief sought in this application.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of 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 AFBCMR Docket Number 01-
03274 in Executive Session on May 7, 2002, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
Mr. Vaughn E. Schlunz, Panel Chair
Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member
Mr. George Franklin, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 6 Nov 01, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 21 Feb 02.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPRSP, dated 8 Mar 02.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Mar 02.
VAUGHN E. SCHLUNZ
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00629
On 3 Jun 81, an Evaluation Officer interviewed the applicant and recommended that the applicant be discharged from the Air Force with a general discharge. He chose not to appeal the commander's determination, which prevented a timely look by another commander at the issues he now raises over 22 years later. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of...
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant served on active duty as an enlisted member from 19 May 1993 through 14 November 2001, when he was discharged to accept a commission. A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant stated he provided a dated document showing the SAEMR annotated on his...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: 02-01288 INDEX CODE 107.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Air Medal with 4th Oak Leaf Cluster (AM 4OLC) awarded for accomplishments on 10 Oct 44 be upgraded to a Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ...
The applicant provided an annotated copy of his WD AGO 53-55 at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR notes that the applicant did not provide any documentation to substantiate his claim for additional campaign credit. DPPRSP also attempted to administratively correct Item 36, Service Outside Continental US and Return, and Item 37, Total Length of Service.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01466 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He receive award of the Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon (SAEMR). The Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon is only awarded to Service members who qualify as Expert on the firing range. The evaluation, with attachment, is at...
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D. ANG/DPFP indicates that neither the military personnel flight (MPF) nor the state headquarters was able to provide documentation substantiating the applicant's claim for the AFAM. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant withdrew his requests for the AFGCM and the AFAM, and acknowledges the administrative...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01197
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01197 INDEX CODE 100.06, 107.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214 be corrected to reflect (1) a Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code that allows reenlistment, (2) additional time served, and (3) receipt of the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award (AFOUA), the Expert...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02662
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force at Exhibits C and D. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR states that the applicant was informed that there was no indication in his record that he was awarded the...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00797
Therefore, the only issues to be considered by the Board are the applicant's requests regarding the SAEMR and the Daedalion Award. The applicant did not respond to their request she provide a copy of the order or the AF Form 522 verifying her entitlement to the SAEMR. Further, we note the Air Force Daedalion Award is neither awarded or authorized by the Department of Defense; as such, it cannot be reflected on the DD Form 215.
The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant's available military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force. 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 submitted previously received documentation to support his request for...