RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02643
INDEX NUMBER: 110.00;107.00
XXXXXXX COUNSEL: None
XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: No
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 22 Feb 07
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be awarded decorations he is entitled to including, but not limited
to, the Purple Heart, the National Defense Medal, and the Vietnam
Service Medal.
His military occupational specialty (Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC))
be returned to the “5” skill level.
He receive back pay previously disallowed with interest.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His discharge was upgraded in 1976 at which time his DD Form 214 was
“stripped.”
He was informed when his discharge was upgraded that an application
for back pay must be filed within one year of discharge. He believes
he applied timely within one year of the discharge upgrade.
The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Air Force as an airman basic on 5 Jul
68. He was discharged from the Air Force on 16 Dec 70 with an
undesirable discharge. On 22 Jan 76, the applicant applied to the Air
Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) for upgrade of his discharge to
honorable. On 24 Jun 76, the AFDRB notified the applicant that his
discharge was upgraded to honorable.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPAC advises that no corrective action is necessary on the
applicant’s request to return his AFSC to the five skill level. They
note that his DD Form 214 accurately reflects his specialty and skill
level.
The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPPPR evaluated the applicant’s request for decorations and note
that his DD Form 214 reflects he was awarded the National Defense
Service Medal (NDSM), the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM), and the
Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal (RVCM). They further note they
were not able to locate documentation in his medical records showing
treatment for injuries sustained as a direct result of enemy action,
necessary for award of the Purple Heart. The applicant did not submit
any documentation to support such a claim. Therefore, they recommend
denial of his request for award of the Purple Heart.
The complete evaluation is at Exhibit D.
DFAS-POCC/DE recommends denial of the applicant’s request for back
pay. Since the applicant’s military pay records are no longer
available from 1970 or 1976, they are unable to determine whether he
was ever compensated in connection with his upgraded discharge in
1976. When Government records are no longer available and the
applicant is unable to provide sufficient evidence to support their
request, the request should be denied.
The complete evaluation is at Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were sent to the applicant on 9
Dec 05 for review and comment within 30 days. To date, a response has
not been received.
_________________________________________________________________
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
offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the
basis for our 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.
4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been
shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will
materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing 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 Docket Number BC-2005-
02643 in Executive Session on 24 January 2006, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Marilyn M. Thomas, Vice Chair
Mr. Vance E. Lineberger, Member
Mr. Jay H. Jordan, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 9 Aug 05, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPPAC, dated 22 Sep 05.
Exhibit D. Memorandum, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 18 Oct 05.
Exhibit E. Memorandum, DFAS-POCC/DE, dated 30 Nov 05.
Exhibit F. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Dec 05.
MARILYN M. THOMAS
Vice Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01959
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01959 INDEX CODE: 131.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 21 DECEMBER 2006 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be corrected to reflect he was awarded the Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) 2A771, Aircraft...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01592
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01592 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 15 November 2006 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Block 11 (Primary Specialty), be corrected to reflect his Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) skill level as 7S071 rather than 7S031. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03764
DPPPR states that in accordance with DoD 1348.33-Manual, Chapter 4, “the JMUA, awarded in the name of the Secretary of Defense, is intended to recognize joint units and activities for meritorious achievement or service, superior to that which is normally, expected.” After consultation with the Joint Staff and researching DOD 1348.33-M Appendix C, DoD Activities Awarded the JMUA; and the Air Force Unit Awards Database their office located 2 awards of the JMUA to AFELM NATO AWACS E-3A for the...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-00615
His records be corrected to reflect award of the Special Experience Identifier (SEI) for Stinger Missiles to Security Police Personnel, and the United States Air Force (USAF) Missile Badge. They indicated that the applicant was not eligible for any Navy marksmanship awards, as he was not on active duty with the Navy; he was in the Air Force. Since the applicant was on active duty in the Air Force, he would not be authorized to wear another service’s devices on awards earned while in the...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03437
On 3 August 1981, the applicant submitted a request to the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) requesting to have his under honorable conditions (general) discharge upgraded to honorable and to change his reenlistment code (RE). AFPC/DPPRS complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPAC recommends the applicant’s request for correction of Item 11 on his DD Form 214 be denied. Based on the documentation in the applicant's records, it appears his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02310
Not every IDMT-qualified member was identified, mostly because they were not in an IDMT position. Only those individuals assigned to an IDMT 4N0X1C CAFSC position at the time of the conversion were considered for promotion as an IDMT in the CY05 cycle. As to whether some individuals were incorrectly promoted because they were “lucky” enough to be identified in the wrong CAFSC, promotion selections are “tentative pending verification by the MPF” (AFI 36-2502) and airmen are not “to...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02361
Only those individuals assigned to an IDMT 4N0X1C CAFSC position at the time of the conversion were considered for promotion as an IDMT in the CY05 cycle. Complete copies of the applicant’s responses, with attachments, are at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: HQ AFPC/DPPPWB advised that prior to the start of the promotion cycle, CFMs are advised that if they feel it is appropriate for the suffix and “slick” AFSCs...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02683
Only those individuals assigned to an IDMT 4N0X1C CAFSC position at the time of the conversion were considered for promotion as an IDMT in the CY05 cycle. As to whether some individuals were incorrectly promoted because they were “lucky” enough to be identified in the wrong CAFSC, promotion selections are “tentative pending verification by the MPF” (AFI 36-2502) and airmen are not “to assume the grade when data verification discovers missing or erroneous data.” Therefore, if an IDMT serving...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02723
Only those individuals assigned to an IDMT 4N0X1C CAFSC position at the time of the conversion were considered for promotion as an IDMT in the CY05 cycle. We therefore conclude the fair and right thing to do is to recommend the 4N0X1C members be given supplemental consideration in the CAFSC 4N0X1 for the 05E6/05E7 promotion cycle. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02404
Only those individuals assigned to an IDMT 4N0X1C CAFSC position at the time of the conversion were considered for promotion as an IDMT in the CY05 cycle. We therefore conclude the fair and right thing to do is to recommend the 4N0X1C members be given supplemental consideration in the CAFSC 4N0X1 for the 05E6/05E7 promotion cycle. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air...