Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00718
Original file (BC-2005-00718.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-00718
                       INDEX CODE:  107.00
                       COUNSEL:  None

                       HEARING DESIRED:  No

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  3 SEP 06

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His DD Form 214 be corrected to reflect he  received  the  Meritorious
Service Medal (MSM).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His final DD Form 214 did not reflect award of the MSM.   He  believes
he should receive the award based on his honorable years of service.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 23 April 1952, the applicant enlisted  in  the  Regular  Air  Force
(RegAF).  He was released from  active  duty  on  22  April  1956  and
transferred to the Air Force Reserves where he served  until  22 April
1960, as which time, he was honorably discharged at the expiration  of
his term of service.  He enlisted in the Air Force Reserves on 6 April
1961 and served continuously until 30 March 1967, at which time he was
honorably discharged and reenlisted on 31 March 1967.  He was  ordered
to extended active duty on 24 July 1970.  On 23  April  1972,  he  was
honorably discharged and enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 24 April
1972  where  he  continuously  served  until   his   1 February   1990
retirement, in the grade of  master  sergeant.  He  served  25  years,
7 months and 28 days of active service.

The applicant’s records reflect he was awarded the Air Medal (AM), Air
Force Commendation (AFCM) with two Bronze Oak  Leaf  Clusters  (OLCs),
Army Commendation Medal, Air Force Achievement  Medal  (AFAM),  Smalls
Arms  Expert  Rifle,  Armed   Forces   Expeditionary   Medal   (AFEM),
Noncommissioned Officer (NCO) Professional Military Education Graduate
Ribbon; Air Reserve  Forces  Meritorious  Service  Ribbon,  Army  Good
Conduct Medal, Combat Readiness Medal with one Silver and  one  Bronze
OLC, Korean Service Medal (KSM), Air  Force  Longevity  Service  Award
Ribbon with one Silver OLC, National Defense Service (NDSM), Air Force
Overseas Long Tour Ribbon, Air Force Overseas Short Tour  Ribbon;  Air
Force Training Ribbon, Vietnam Service Medal (VSM) with one Silver and
two Bronze Service Stars, Air Force Outstanding Unit  Award  with  two
Bronze OLCs, United Nations Service  Medal,  Air  Force  Good  Conduct
Medal with one Silver and one Bronze OLC.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPPR states the MSM  is  awarded  for  outstanding  noncombat
meritorious achievement or service to the United States; normally, the
acts or service rendered must be comparable to that required  for  the
Legion of Merit (LOM), but in a duty of a lesser  though  considerable
responsibility.  The LOM  is  awarded  for  exceptionally  meritorious
conduct in the performance of outstanding  service  to  the  U.S.   In
peacetime, award to U.S. military personnel is limited to  service  in
an extremely difficult duty that is performed in a clearly exceptional
manner, if  such  service  is  of  marked  national  or  international
significance to the Air Force or the DoD.

While on active duty, the applicant received three  AFCMs  -  one  for
outstanding achievement and two for meritorious service.  He  did  not
receive a decoration when he retired.

HQ AFPC/DPPPR further states individuals cannot  recommend  themselves
for a decoration.   Furthermore,  decorations  are  not  automatically
awarded at the end of a tour, it is the supervisor’s  decision  as  to
whether or not an individual will be  recommended  for  a  decoration.
The applicant has not provided a  copy  of  a  recommendation  package
showing that  a  recommendation  for  a  decoration  was  placed  into
official channels.  The applicant has not provided  any  documentation
indicating he applied to his chain of command regarding any decoration
for any assignment while on active  duty;  nor  has  he  provided  any
justification for not having requested consideration while  on  active
duty.  The applicant has not provided any  documentation  regarding  a
recommendation  package  for  any  decoration  for  his   service   or
achievements while on active duty.  Without any official documentation
or statements from his  chain  of  command,  his  entitlement  of  any
additional decorations cannot be verified.  Therefore,  based  on  the
information provided and the applicant’s personnel records  AFPC/DPPPR
recommends the requested relief be denied.

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 1
April 2005, 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 an injustice.   We  took  notice  of  the
applicant's complete submission in judging the  merits  of  the  case;
however, we agree with the opinion and the recommendation of  the  Air
Force and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or  an  injustice.   The
applicant believes he earned the MSM because of his years  of  service
and his records should reflect receipt of the award, presumably at the
time of his retirement.  However, as noted by the Air Force, in  order
for a servicemember to receive the MSM, they must  be  recommended  by
their commander.  However, we find  no  evidence  in  the  applicant's
records indicating that his commander recommended  him  for  the  MSM.
Nor has the applicant provided any documentation showing he applied to
his chain of command regarding the decoration while on active duty, or
an explanation as to why he did  not  request  consideration  for  the
decoration while on active duty.  His DD Form 214 clearly reflects his
many accomplishments and  awards  and  for  this  this  he  is  to  be
commended.  Nonetheless, without official documentation or  statements
from his chain of command,  his  eligibility  for  an  MSM  cannot  be
verified.  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 BC-
2005-00718 in Executive Session on 19 May 2005, under  the  provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

                       Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
                       Ms. Dorothy P. Loeb, Member
                       Ms. Marcia Jane Bachman, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 24 Feb 05, w/atch.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 22 Mar 05.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Apr 05.




                                  RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                  Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02017

    Original file (BC-2006-02017.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Therefore the only remaining issue before the Board is the award of the ICM. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant 15 September 2006, for review and response. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01576

    Original file (BC-2002-01576.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    His Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) be upgraded to a Airman’s Medal (AmnM) for action performed on 13 November 1982. b. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: On 1 October 1984, he was awarded an Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM) for Heroism for his actions on 13 November 1982. A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00186

    Original file (BC-2004-00186.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00186 INDEX CODE: 131.00, 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM), Third Oak Leaf Cluster (3OLC), for the period 3 August 1997 to 27 February 2001, be upgraded to a Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) and he be considered for promotion to the grade...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01587

    Original file (BC-2010-01587.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Everyone received a medal but him. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. Additionally, the applicant cannot recommend himself for entitlement to a decoration.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03480

    Original file (BC-2003-03480.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In January 1973, he was thoroughly evaluated by Orthopedic Services with negative results. On 20 January 2004, the Air Force office of primary responsibility requested the applicant provide a more detailed account of the circumstances regarding the injuries he received in Vietnam on 10 January 1969. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR states the PH is awarded for injuries or wounds incurred as a direct result of enemy action;...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01363

    Original file (BC-2005-01363.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Furthermore, the applicant has not provided any evidence to reflect a second JMUA was awarded. However, there is no evidence in the applicant’s records indicating she served in another unit that was awarded the JMUA; nor has the applicant provided any documentation substantiating she was awarded a second JMUA. However, should the applicant provide documentation substantiating she was assigned to another unit receiving the JMUA, this Board would be willing to review the materials for...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01752

    Original file (BC-2003-01752.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His DD Form 214 does not reflect award of the BSM. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR on 17 June 2003 informed the applicant that his records did not indicate he was recommended for or was awarded the medal. The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 May 03, w/atchs.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03365

    Original file (BC-2003-03365.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Since the 7th and 13th Air Forces’ Decoration Review Boards reviewed all decorations at that time, they were in the best position to determine which recommendations for the BSM should be awarded and which should be downgraded to the AFCM in order to provide consistency in decorations. DPPPR concluded by stating that the applicant has not made any effort for almost 30 years to have his AFCM (1OLC) upgraded; has not provided any documents showing he submitted a request for upgrade through...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802041

    Original file (9802041.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Her request for senior rater endorsement on the EPR should not be granted at this time. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and provides the wing commander’s concurrence of her request for senior rater indorsement. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice to warrant amending the MSM citation to include...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00519

    Original file (BC-2004-00519.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00519 INDEX NUMBER: 107.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Air Force Commendation Medal, First Oak Leaf Cluster (AFCM, 1 OLC), he was awarded for the period 6 July 2000 to 20 October 2001, be upgraded to the Meritorious Service Medal. Despite the fact the erroneous...