Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03062
Original file (BC-2002-03062.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  02-03062
            INDEX CODE:  107.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or  Discharge  from  Active
Duty, reflect service during the Gulf War and any awards  for  that
service.

___________________________________________________________________

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:

On 10 Feb 81, applicant enlisted in the Regular  Air  Force  for  a
period of four years in the grade of airman basic (AB/E-1).  He was
progressively promoted to the grade of staff  sergeant  (SSgt/E-5),
with a date of rank and effective date of 1 Aug 88.  He  served  an
overseas tour in the United Kingdom during the period 15 Oct  82  -
3 Oct 86.  He had numerous  TDY  tours  overseas,  serving  in  the
United Kingdom (10 Jul 89), Spain (6 Aug  90)  and  United  Kingdom
(1 Jan 91).

A resume of applicant’s airman performance report (APR) profile, as
reflected in his master personnel record follows:

            PERIOD CLOSING              OVERALL EVALUATION



           27 Oct 87                                    9
                 30 Jun 88                                    8
                 30 Jun 89                                    9
                  30  Jun  90                                     5
(EPR)
*                 30  Jun  91                                     4
(EPR)

*  Applicant’s EPR closing 30 Jun 91 reflects he  was  deployed  to
RAF Mildenhall, in support of VOLANT PINE 90 - 91.

On  18  Oct  91,  applicant  was  honorably  discharged  under  the
provisions of AFR 35-4, with a narrative reason for  separation  as
disability -  entitled  to  severance  pay.   He  served  10 years,
8 months and 9 days of active duty.  He completed 4 years, 3 months
and 21 days of Foreign Service.

Applicant’s records reflect award of  the  Air  Force  Commendation
Medal, Air Force Achievement  Medal,  Air  Force  Outstanding  Unit
Award, Air Force Longevity Service Medal (with one bronze oak  leaf
cluster), Air Force Training Ribbon, Air Force Overseas  Long  Tour
Ribbon, National Defense Service Medal, NCO PME  Ribbon  (with  one
bronze oak leaf cluster), and Air Force Good  Conduct  Medal  (with
two bronze oak leaf clusters).

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommended disapproval of the applicant’s request to
add service in the Persian Gulf and  award  of  a  medal  for  such
service.  They state that there is no  indication  in  his  records
that the applicant was ever deployed  to  the  Persian  Gulf.   The
Southwest Asia Service Medal (SWASM) is awarded for  deployment  of
30 consecutive or 60 nonconsecutive days to the Persian Gulf during
the period of 2 Aug 90 - 30 Nov 95.

On 25 Oct 02, they informed him that there was no documentation  in
his records showing that he was TDY to the Persian  Gulf.   He  was
asked to provide the necessary documentation  to  substantiate  his
claim.  He did not respond.  Without any documentation  showing  he
was actually deployed to the Persian  Gulf  in  direct  support  of
Operation DESERT SHIELD/DESERT STORM, there is no way to verify any
additional awards.

The complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  the  applicant
on 31 Jan 03 for review and comment within 30  days.   As  of  this
date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D).

___________________________________________________________________

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 error or injustice.  We took notice of
the applicant's complete submission in judging the  merits  of  the
case.  The evidence of record shows that the  applicant’s  DD  Form
214 was administratively corrected to reflect that he  served  from
2 Aug 90 to 18 Oct 91 in support of Operation DESERT  SHIELD/STORM.
However, no evidence has been submitted to substantiate that he was
ever deployed to the Persian Gulf in direct  support  of  Operation
DESERT  SHIELD/STORM,  i.e.,  TDY  orders  and   travel   vouchers.
Therefore, we are unable  to  determine  his  eligibility  for  any
awards that he might be entitled to for such service.   Should  the
applicant provide documentation to substantiate his claim, we would
be willing to reconsider his petition.  In view of  the  above,  we
find no 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
02-03062 in Executive Session on 1 April 2003, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Vice Chair
      Mr. Vaughn E. Schlunz, Member
      Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 Sep 02.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPR, dated 23 Jan 03, w/atch.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 Jan 03.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Vice Chair


Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03062

    Original file (BC-2002-03062.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommended disapproval of the applicant’s request to add service in the Persian Gulf and award of a medal for such service. On 25 Oct 02, they informed him that there was no documentation in his records showing that he was TDY to the Persian Gulf. The evidence of record shows that the applicant’s DD Form 214 was administratively corrected to reflect that he served from 2 Aug 90 to 18...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03790

    Original file (BC-2002-03790.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his request, the applicant provided copies of a letter of appreciation, his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, and a Certificate of Appreciation. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 21 Feb 03 for review and response. As of this date, no response...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01121

    Original file (BC 2014 01121.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He should have been awarded the SWASM for his support of Operation VIGILANT WARRIOR and that time should be reflected as foreign service on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPAPP recommends the Board review the documentation provided by the applicant and determine if it is...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-00154

    Original file (BC-2008-00154.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The AFPC/DPSIDR evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSIMC recommends denial of his request to change his DD Form 214 to indicate a date of separation of 10 Sep 90 and indicates the finance system cannot confirm he took terminal leave prior to his separation from the Air Force. He did not submit documentation to substantiate an error in his separation date. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-01920

    Original file (BC-2008-01920.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-01920 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to show his entitlement to the Southwest Asia Service Medal (SWASM) in support of Operation DESERT SHIELD/STORM. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-02724

    Original file (BC-2010-02724.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC- 2010-02724 in Executive Session on 20 Jan 11, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 2 Aug 10, w/atchs. Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSIDR, dated 16 Nov 10. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Nov 10.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02553

    Original file (BC 2013 02553.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPAPP recommends denial of the applicant’s request to reflect Foreign Service in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He participated in Operation SOUTHERN WATCH from approximately 6 Dec 97 through 27 Apr 98 for 127 days. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01046

    Original file (BC 2014 01046.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01046 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the following awards and decorations: Kuwait Liberation Medal-Saudi Arabia (KLM-SA) Kuwait Liberation Medal-Kuwait (KLM-K) Southwest Asia Service Medal with three Bronze Service Stars (SWASM, w/3 BSSs). The SWASM is awarded to members of the United States Armed Forces who served in support of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02414

    Original file (BC 2013 02414.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no official documentation in the applicant’s military personnel record to verify he deployed in support of a qualifying operation in a qualifying area of eligibility for award of the Kuwait Liberation Medal-Kingdom of Saudi Arabia or the Kuwait Liberation Medal-Government of Kuwait. Upon final Board decision, administrative correction of his official military personnel record will be completed by AFPC/DPSOR. ________________________________________________________________ The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002187

    Original file (0002187.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The complete submission is at Exhibit F. The applicant also provided a letter from his brother affirming that the applicant was in Saudi Arabia during the timeframe that he claims. The applicant’s brother states that he was deployed to Saudi Arabia twice during the period the applicant claims to have been in Saudi Arabia and that they were both billeted at Eskan Village outside Riyadh. They also noted that while the existing records did not clearly indicate that the applicant served in...