RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00161
INDEX CODE: 107.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS:
Award of the Air Medal, with one oak leaf cluster (AM, w/1OLC).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
On 3 June 1967, he and three other individuals were recommended and
approved for award of the AM, w/1OLC. On 7 May 1972, one of the four
individuals (retired CMSgt B---) received the AM, w/1OLC. However, he and
the other two members have never received the medal. He believes his name
was omitted due to a clerical error.
In support of his request, applicant submits statements from one of the
four individuals who was awarded the AM, with a copy of the special order
awarding the AM; a copy of the Air Medal recommendation, dated 3 June 1967;
and, additional documents associated with the issues cited in his
contentions. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant’s Total Active Federal Military Service Date (TAFMSD) is 30
November 1956. He was progressively promoted to the grade of senior master
sergeant (E-8), with an effective date and date of rank of 1 June 1974.
The applicant served in Vietnam from 15 December 1966 to 11 December 1967.
He was assigned to the Numbered Troop Carrier Squadron (TCS) as a
maintenance supervisor. His combat record reveals: 12 aerial missions
during the Vietnam era, 1 December 1965-1 April 1966; Vietnam Defense, with
Bronze Service Star (BSS), 1 December 1965-30 January 1966; Vietnam Air
Campaign (BSS), 1 February - 1 April 1966; Vietnam Air Offensive (BSS),
15 December 1966-8 March 1967; and Vietnam Air Offensive, Phase II, 9 March-
1 December 1967.
Information extracted from applicant’s submission reveals that, on 3 June
1967, the squadron’s chief of maintenance submitted a request to the
squadron awards officer for assistance in awarding the Air Medal to four of
his aircraft maintenance personnel.
Applicant’s military personnel records reveal that, on 3 December 1970, the
Directorate of Awards and Decorations, HQ Numbered Air Force, disapproved
the proposed decoration recommendation for all four members.
Applicant’s submission contains a copy of Special Order G-1056, dated 7 May
1972, reflecting only one of the four members being awarded the Air Medal
and first oak leaf cluster for meritorious achievement while participating
in aerial flight during the period of 1 December 1966 to 31 May 1967.
The applicant’s DD Form 214, dated 29 November 1968, reflects the following
decorations: Air Force Longevity Service Award (AFLSA), with two bronze
oak leaf clusters (OLCs); Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal (RVCM);
Vietnam Service Medal (VSM), with one BSS; Vietnam Air Offensive Campaign,
15 December 1966-8 March 1967; and, the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award
(AFOUA), with one bronze OLC. His DD Form 214, dated 29 November 1972,
reflects award of VSM, with four BSS; AFOUA, with one silver (OLC); Air
Force Good Conduct Medal (AFGCM), with three OLC; and, the AFLSA, with
three OLC.
On 30 November 1976, the applicant was relieved from active duty and
retired, effective 1 December 1976, and assigned to the retired Reserve.
He had completed a total of 20 years and 1 day of active service for
retirement and was serving in the grade of senior master sergeant (E-8) at
the time of retirement. On 29 November 1986, the applicant was relieved
from his retired Reserve assignment and honorably discharged from the Air
Force Reserve in the grade of E-8.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends the application be denied and that he be directed
to exercise the provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)
to resolve this matter. DPPPR states that there is no documentation in the
applicant’s records, or provided by the applicant, that allows their office
to conclusively determine what the final outcome of the AM recommendation
was. However, filed in applicant’s military personnel records was a
letter, dated 3 December 1970, disapproving the AMs on all four
individuals. There is no evidence available that would explain how or why
only one individual ultimately was awarded the AM.
DPPPR indicates that, under Section 526 of the NDAA, the applicant and the
other two individuals may again be recommended for the AM. The original
recommending official may resubmit the original recommendation, through a
congressional member, to the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council
(SAFPC) for consideration.
The HQ AFPC/DPPPR evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 19 March
2004 for review and response. 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. After reviewing the evidence provided by
this applicant, we do not find the evidence sufficient to warrant the
approval of the requested relief. In this respect, we note that the Award
Board disapproved the Air Medal recommendation on 3 December 1970. Other
than his own assertions, we have seen no evidence of a clerical error
omitting the applicant’s name for award of the cited medal. Even though
one of the four individuals initially recommended for the award in 1967
did, for reason(s) unexplained here, receive an Air Medal approximately
five years later, this alone does not, in our opinion, substantiate that
approval for the other members is warranted. We do not doubt the
outstanding contributions the applicant made during the course of his
career. However, in the absence of documentary evidence substantiating
that the requested award recommendation was improperly disapproved, we do
not find the evidence provided establishes to our satisfaction that the
applicant has been the victim of an error or injustice. Although we are
unpersuaded by the evidence submitted, we note that the applicant has
another avenue, under the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), in
which to resolve his claim for award of the Air Medal and we encourage him
to exercise the provisions of the NDAA in resolving this matter. In view
of the above, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force
office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as our findings
in the case. Accordingly, the applicant’s request is not favorably
considered.
_________________________________________________________________
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 29 July 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Member
Mr. Vance E. Lineberger, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR
Docket Number BC-2004-00161.
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Jan 04, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPR, dated 11 Mar 04, w/atch.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Mar 04.
RICHARD A. PETERSON
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00522
Applicant’s military personnel records reveal that, on 3 December 1970, the Directorate of Awards and Decorations, Numbered Air Force, disapproved the proposed decoration recommendation for all four members. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). In this respect, we note that the Award Board disapproved the Air Medal recommendation on 3 December 1970.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01231
The timeline for submitting decorations is two years from the date of the act or achievement. A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states the recommendation to deny his request based on the fact one of the criteria: “be made by someone, other than the member himself, in the member’s chain...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-03305
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03305 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE: 29 April 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Presidential Unit Citation with 3 Oak Leaf Clusters (PUC w/3 OLC), and the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal with 1 Bronze Service Star (AFEM w/1 BSS). ...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02433
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR states there is no indication in the applicant’s records that he was recommended or awarded the DFC with first through third OLC. HQ AFPC/DPPPR further stated the applicant’s one year service in Vietnam was verified by his DD Form 214 dated 26 February 1972. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-03040
Applicant’s AF Form 7, Airman Military Record, Item 10 (Awards), reflects the DFC and Air Medal (1OLC). After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, we find that insufficient evidence has been presented to support award of additional Air Medals. In the absence of such evidence we agree with the opinion and recommendation from the Air Force office of primary responsibility that the applicant did not provide any documentation to support his claim with regards to additional Air Medals.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01558
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01558 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) be corrected to reflect award of the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM), and the AFCM, Second Oak Leaf Cluster (2OLC). The Air Force has...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00699
On 9 August 2004, the applicant submitted a similar request to have his records corrected to reflect award of the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award (AFOUA) with one Oak Leaf Cluster (OLC), the Air Force Recruiter Ribbon (AFRR) and the Air Force Master Level Occupational Badge for Supply. A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant, in response to the...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-01961
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01961 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His separation document (DD 214) be corrected to show he was awarded the Korean Defense Service Medal (KDSM), Global War on Terrorism Medal (GWOT), Air and Space Campaign Medal, and the Meritorious Service Medal w/One Oak Leaf...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02044
It should be noted that this Board does not have the authority to award the MOH. Regarding the applicants request that his uncle be awarded the Air Medal with two Oak Leaf Clusters (AM w/2OLCs), based on the NPRC records it appears his uncle was awarded the AM w/1OLC; however, as previously stated by DPSIDRA, the applicant has not provided any official documentation to substantiate the award of the AM w/1OLC was actually made in order for his uncle to be eligible for possible entitlement...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02188-AM
Therefore, the facts surrounding his Air Force military service cannot be verified. The complete DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant provided a photocopy of the Air Force Exceptional civilian award. We note the memorandum decreed by General “Hap Arnold” in regard to the routine awarding of the Air Medal; therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air...