Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01598
Original file (BC-2003-01598.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01598
            INDEX CODE:  107.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty,
be corrected to reflect the Aerial Achievement Medal,  the  Air  Force
Good Conduct Medal, the  Armed  Forces  Expeditionary  Medal  and  the
Enlisted Aircrew Badge.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His current Military Personnel Flight (MPF) record  does  not  reflect
these medals, ribbons and badge.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits four certificates, a  copy
of the citation to accompany the award of the Aerial Achievement Medal
and two copies of his DD Form 214.

Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 17 December 1992 for  a
period of four years.  On 16 December 1996, he was honorably  released
from active duty.  He served four years.   On  17  December  1996,  he
enlisted in the Air Force Reserve.  On 6 July 2000, he  was  honorably
discharged.  On 1 October 2001, applicant reenlisted  in  the  Regular
Air Force for a period of four years.  On 19  December  2001,  he  was
honorably discharged from active duty.  He served two  months  and  19
days.  On 20 December 2001 applicant  was  tendered  and  accepted  an
appointment in the United States Air Force Reserve  in  the  grade  of
second lieutenant.

On 1 July 2003, he was informed that the Aerial Achievement Medal  and
Air Force Good Conduct Medal were already reflected on his 16 December
1996 DD Form 214.  He was  also  informed  that  the  locally-produced
Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal certificate was not a valid form.  In
order to  verify  his  eligibility  for  award  of  the  Armed  Forces
Expeditionary Medal, he was asked to provide a copy of his  TDY  order
and Travel Voucher.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSFM recommends that the applicant’s DD Form 214 be  updated  to
reflect the award of the Enlisted Aircrew Badge.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPR states that the applicant  did  not  provide  any  official
documentation to substantiate his claim for award of the Armed  Forces
Expeditionary Medal.  Without the necessary documents, they are unable
to verify his eligibility for the Armed  Forces  Expeditionary  Medal,
Armed Forces Service Medal, or Southwest Asia Service Medal  with  one
bronze service star.

If the applicant was deployed in support of Operation PROVIDE COMFORT,
as stated in the citation, he could  be  eligible  for  award  of  the
Southwest Asia Service  Medal  or  the  Armed  Forces  Service  Medal.
Without a copy of his TDY order and Travel Voucher, they are unable to
verify that he meets the criteria for this award.   If  the  applicant
was deployed in support of Operation SOUTHERN WATCH in 1996, as stated
in the locally-produced certificate, he could be eligible for award of
the Armed Force Expeditionary Medal.  Again, without a copy of his TDY
order and Travel Voucher, they are unable to verify that he meets  the
criteria for this award.

Therefore, they recommend denial of applicant’s request.

A complete copy of their evaluation, with attachments, is  at  Exhibit
D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 7 November 2003, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded
to the applicant for review and response within 30 days.  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 timely filed.

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;
however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force
and adopt their rationale as the basis for  the  conclusion  that  the
applicant  has  not  been  the  victim  of  an  error  or   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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 17 December 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

                       Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel Chair
                       Mr. E. David Hoard, Member
                       Ms. Ann-Cecile Reynolds, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 Apr 03, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSFM, dated 23 Jun 03.
      Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, w/atchs.
      Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Nov 03.




                             DAVID C. VAN GASBECK
                             Panel Chair



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | 0001810A

    Original file (0001810A.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-01810 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: In the applicant’s request for reconsideration, he requests additional credit for his foreign service and that he be awarded the following decorations: Air Force Outstanding Unit Award with Combat “V” Device, the Vietnam Service and Campaign...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00385

    Original file (BC-2003-00385.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00385 INDEX CODE: 107.00 APPLICANT COUNSEL: None SSN HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214 be corrected to reflect award of the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal in support of Operation SOUTHERN WATCH and the Southwest Asia Service Medal. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00266

    Original file (BC-2003-00266.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR recommends denial of the applicant’s request for award of the Air Medal, two bronze service stars for the Vietnam Service Medal, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm, and one of the two awards of the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award. However, he refused to withdraw his application for award of the Vietnam Service Medal with two Bronze Service Stars, the Republic of Vietnam...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02058

    Original file (BC-2003-02058.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-02058 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (AFEM). A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02577

    Original file (BC-2003-02577.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    While it is noted the EPR for the period ending 3 June 1996 indicates he was deployed during Operation Southern Watch, for which the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal was awarded, we believe that based on the time period he was deployed, it would appear he was deployed initially in support of Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm thereby making him eligible for the SWASM. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-04278

    Original file (BC-2003-04278.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In a letter to the Air Force Personnel Council (AFPC) in 1987, the applicant requested award of the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal and the Purple Heart Medal. On 8 January 1988, AFPC/DPPPRA advised the applicant he was entitled to the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (AFEM), National Defense Service Medal (NDSM), and the Air Force Longevity Service Award (AFLSA). The applicant was again informed he was not eligible for award of the Purple Heart Medal on 8 February 2000.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0202065

    Original file (0202065.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ 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. He was asked to provide a copy of his TDY order, showing that he was deployed in direct support of Operation ALLIED FORCE, and a copy of his Travel Voucher to show that he was in the designated area for 30 consecutive or 60 nonconsecutive days. The KCM is...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9703338

    Original file (9703338.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Although the applicant has been unable to provide copies of TDY orders or travel vouchers in support of his request, an AF Form 7 contained in his records reflects that he performed 58 days TDY in SEA. Applicant requests award of the Vietnam Service Medal, Air Force Overseas Ribbon, etc. -4 5: ,- We recommend disapproval of the applicant's request for award of the Vietnam Service Medal and Air Force Overseas Ribbon.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0001810

    Original file (0001810.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-01810 INDEX CODE: 100.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Report of Separation from Active Duty, DD Form 214, issued on 4 May 1976, be corrected to reflect award of the Purple Heart and that his foreign service was 1 year, 5 months and 14 days rather than 1 year and 20 days. DPAPP1...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01013

    Original file (BC-2004-01013.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He received five Airman/Enlisted Performance Reports, closing 7 April 1967, 7 April 1968, 7 October 1968, 7 January 1969 and 14 December 1969, in which the promotion recommendations were “Highly Recommended for Air Force Career,” “Highly Recommended for Air Force Career,” “7,” “8,” and “8.” He received the National Defense Service Medal, the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, and the Air Force Good Conduct Medal. Instead, he filed another DD Form 149, asking again for the DFC and VSM. ...