RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-
02232
INDEX CODE: 107.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 18 JANUARY 2007
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be awarded the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM).
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He gave an outstanding effort to the Air Force his entire tour of
duty and should have earned the AFCM for serving his country. He
was told by his noncommissioned officer in charge (NCOIC) that he
was recommending him for the AFCM. His NCOIC was shipped out of
Vietnam and his replacement took the medal recommendation away from
him.
In support of his application, he submits a personal statement, and
a copy of his DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report
of Transfer or Discharge.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
___________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant served on active duty in the Air Force from 20 Jul 67
– 21 Jan 71. His DD Form 214 reflects 3 years, 6 months, and 2
days of active military service and that he was awarded the
National Defense Service Medal and the Vietnam Service Medal with
one Bronze Service Star.
AFPC/DPPPR verified applicant’s entitlement to the Air Force
Outstanding Unit Award with Valor and one Oak Leaf Cluster, Air
Force Good Conduct Medal, Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with
Palm, and the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal and
administratively corrected his DD Form 214 on 11 Aug 05.
___________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends the application be denied and states, in
part, that after a complete review of the applicant’s military
record and provided documentation, they were unable to find
evidence of a recommendation to validate the applicant’s
entitlement to the AFCM.
Current timelines for submitting decorations is two years from the
date of the act or achievement. In the case of World War II
decorations, 3 May 1951 was the cut-off for submission. However,
under the Fiscal Year 1996 National Defense Authorization Act
(NDAA), Section 526, which was enacted into law on 10 Feb 96, this
timeline has now been waived. Under this Act, which lifted the
time limitations on submitting award recommendations, veterans who
may make a case for award consideration (or upgrade of a previously
awarded decoration) not previously eligible because of these
limits, may now submit for award consideration. However, the
written recommendation must meet two criteria: (1) be made by
someone, other than the member himself, in the member’s chain of
command at the time of the incident, and, who has firsthand
knowledge of the acts or achievements; and, (2) be submitted
through a congressional member who can ask a military service to
review a proposal for a decoration based on the merits of the
proposal and the award criteria in existence when the event
occurred.
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 19 Aug 05, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to
the applicant for review and response 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; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the
Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale
as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the
victim of an error or injustice. In addition, we note the
applicant has not provided any documentation from his former chain
of command substantiating his request. 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 Docket Number BC-2005-
02232 in Executive Session on 6 October 2005, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Wayne R. Gracie, Panel Chair
Ms. Sue A. Lumpkins, Member
Mr. Terry L. Scott, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Jul 05, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 4 Aug 05.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Aug 05.
WAYNE R. GRACIE
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00866
In accordance with AFI 36-2803, recommendations for the AFCM and AFAM must be submitted as soon as possible following the act, achievement, or service. There is no documentation available or provided by the applicant that indicates his commander recommended or approved awards for the AFCM or AFAM. The timeline for submitting decorations is two years from the date of the act or achievement.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02306
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005- 02306 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 25 JANUARY 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Distinguished Service Medal (DSM) and the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM). To be awarded the AFCM, a member must have distinguished himself by meritorious...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00456
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends the applicant’s request for award of the PH be denied. 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 stated he received...
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...
Applicant states that he does not feel that the award should be treated as an upgrade to the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM). _______________________________________________________________________ _____________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that competent authority determined that his actions on 21 August 1965, at Bien Hoa Air Base, Vietnam, merited the award of the Bronze...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03541
In support of his request, the applicant provided a copy an AFCM citation and certificate awarded to a former member of his unit which was awarded during the time he alleges he was assigned. However, after review by AFPC/DPPRY, it was discovered the applicant is also entitled to the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award with Valor and one oak leaf cluster, the Air Force Good Conduct Medal, the Air Force Longevity Service Award, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm, and the Republic...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02250
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02250 INDEX CODE: 131.01 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 22 JAN 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be considered for promotion to the grade of major by special selection board (SSB) for the CY04A Major Central Selection Board (1 Nov 04) (P0404A) with his Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01809
DPPPR further states the 377th TCS did not receive the RVNGC w/P during the time the applicant served in Vietnam. He requests recheck be done regarding the unit number (Exhibit E). In this respect, the Board notes that during his service in Vietnam the applicant was not assigned to a unit that received the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm.
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. The Chief, Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, AFPC/DPPPWB, also reviewed this application and indicated that the applicant’s total promotion score for the 99E5 cycle is 275.76 and the score required for selection in his Control Air Force Specialty Code (CAFSC) was 276.70. Current Air Force promotion policy dictates that, before a decoration is credited for a specific promotion cycle, the closeout date of the decoration must be on...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00968
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: After a thorough review of his military personnel record, AFPC/DPPPR was unable to verify his entitlement to the PHM and therefore recommends denial of his request for award of the PHM. DPPPR’s complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B. AFPC/DPSO addresses the applicant’s request for award of the CIB. DPSO’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit...