Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2005 | 2005-01641
Original file (2005-01641.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-01641
            INDEX CODE:  107.00
      xxxxxxxxxxxxxx   COUNSEL:  NONE

      xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx  HEARING DESIRED:  NOT INDICATED

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  20 NOV 2006

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to show he was  not  awarded  the  Air  Force
Commendation Medal (AFCM) 3rd Oak Leaf Cluster, (3OLC) for the  period
16 March 2004 to 30 June  2004  and  the  AFCM  w/3  OLC  citation  be
replaced with a citation he submitted with his application.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The narrative portion of the AFCM w/3 OLC does not accurately  reflect
his accomplishments during the time period of the medal.

In support of his request, the applicant submits a copy of a letter to
the 12th Mission Support Squadron, a copy the AFCM w/3 OLC Citation, a
Memorandum for the 12th Mission Support  Squadron,  Special  Order  G-
1176, AF IMT Form 77, Supplemental Evaluation Sheet,  a  copy  of  the
proposed citation, and background emails pertaining to the removal  of
the decoration.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant’s records reflect that he entered the Regular Air  Force  on
26 March 1986 and was progressively promoted to the grade of major.

On 16 March 2005, the applicant submitted a letter to  12th MSS/DPMPEA
to return the AFCM w/3 OLC, because he believes it  does  not  reflect
his work and accomplishments for that time period.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The AFPC/DPPPR recommends denial of the  applicant’s  request.   DPPPR
states  in  accordance  with  AFI   36-2803,   paragraph   1.7.;   the
recommending official initiates, prepares, and  signs  recommendations
for decorations and determines inclusive periods for the award.   This
is not determined by the individual.

DPPPR states the decoration  was  submitted  and  approved  by  United
States Central Air Force  (USCENTAF)  and  they  have  determined  the
decoration would remain as approved.

The DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the  applicant  on
24 Jun 05, for review and comment 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.  After a thorough review  of  the
applicant’s submission and the available evidence of  record,  we  are
not persuaded that the relief requested should be granted.  While  the
applicant may refused to accept the approved decoration and may  elect
not to wear the decoration, the Board notes the  award  was  submitted
and approved by United States Central Air  Force  in  accordance  with
applicable directives and should remain as approved. With  respect  to
replacement of the original  citation,  should  the  applicant  obtain
support from the recommending  official  to  substitute  the  original
citation with a corrected version,  the  Board  would  be  willing  to
reconsider his  application.   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 a 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 no considered with this application.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket  Number  BC-2005-
01641 in Executive Session on 24 August 2005, under the provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

                 Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Member
                 Mr. John B. Hennessey, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 9 May 05, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 21 Jun 05.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Jun 05.





      KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
      Panel Chair





Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02526

    Original file (BC-2005-02526.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Since the order for this decoration was published on 2 November 2004, the citation could not have been filed in his selection record nor reflected in any official personnel data systems when the board convened. Thus, it is our opinion that the AFCM 1OLC was not a matter of record at the time the selection board convened and accordingly, it was not required to be included in his selection record. The Board notes the applicant’s Officer Selection Brief (OSB) did not reflect the duty title of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01949

    Original file (BC-2005-01949.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states upon completion of his last mission on 9 September 1944 only officers were awarded the DFC. The evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 29 July 2005, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days. With respect to the issue of the DFC, the Board finds no supporting documentation in...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02085

    Original file (BC-2005-02085.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    According to DPPPR the applicant’s official military record does not contain a recommendation or special orders indicating he was awarded the additional OLC to the AM for the remaining six combat missions flown. The DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states normally a person would be awarded an OLC for each additional six missions, and he never received the cluster...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02326

    Original file (BC-2007-02326.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    Current Air Force promotion policy, AFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion Program, Table 2.2, Rule 5, Note 2, {sic – should be Rule 7} dictates that before a decoration is credited for a specific promotion cycle, the close-out date of the decoration must be on or before the PECD, and the date of the DÉCOR-6, Request for Decoration Printout (RDP), must be before the date of selections for the cycle in question. Although the Board is sympathetic to the applicant’s near-miss for promotion, evidence...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02807

    Original file (BC-2005-02807.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant has earned the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC), the Air Medal with six Oak Leaf Clusters, the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award, the Vietnam Service Medal, the Air Force Longevity Service Award, and the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR recommends denial and states that the applicant has provided the special orders and letters from former crew members who did receive the AFCM...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02840

    Original file (BC-2006-02840.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The commander stated he contacted her former commander to determine the specifics of her decoration and fully supports supplemental promotion consideration. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR recommends approval of the applicant’s request to have her initiation date of the AFCM coincide with her PCS in Aug 05 (Exhibit C). Therefore we recommend the applicant’s records be corrected as indicated below.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2002-00614-2

    Original file (BC-2002-00614-2.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    In letters, dated 11 November 2003 and 10 February 2004, the applicant requests the AFCM, 3 OLC, be upgraded to the MSM, 2 OLC, and consideration for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by an SSB for the P0501B board. Applicant’s complete submissions, with attachments, are at Exhibits K and L. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR recommends the Board make the determination concerning the applicant’s request to upgrade...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01510

    Original file (BC-2005-01510.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    His DD Form 214 reflects award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm, the Vietnam Service Medal with 4 Bronze Service Stars, the National Defense Service Medal with one Bronze Service Star, and the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal. The Board notes the applicant’s records were administratively corrected to reflect award of the Korean Defense Service Medal for the time he served in Korea. The Board also notes no evidence has been provided indicating the applicant was...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02480

    Original file (BC-2005-02480.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 states he served during World War II from 24 March 1942 through 17 January 1946. He further states he is requesting an OLC not an additional medal (Exhibit E). After thoroughly reviewing the available personnel records, we found no evidence to verify he...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02531

    Original file (BC-2005-02531.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was not issued medals for his involvement in the Korean Conflict and the French Croix de Guerre was not awarded to him due to his being on rest and relaxation (R&R) at the time of issuance to the crew members. According to DPPPR, the applicant’s record was forwarded to the Office of Assignment on 25 September 2003 to confirm the applicant’s foreign military Service. We agree with the opinions...