RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00108
INDEX CODE: 107.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 14 Oct 07
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be corrected to reflect he was awarded the Unit
Meritorious Citation Medal.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He earned the medal before he separated from active duty, but it was
too late to update his records at the local military personnel flight
(MPF).
Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is attached at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 3 November 1999, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force
(RegAF).
The applicant’s DD Form 214 reflects he was awarded the Air Force
Achievement Medal (AFAM), Air Force Training Ribbon, National Defense
Service Medal (NDSM), Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal, Air
Force Longevity Service Award (AFLSA), NCO Professional Military
Education Ribbon, Small Arms Expert Marksmanship ribbon (SAEMR) with
device, Air Force Overseas Short Tour Ribbon, Air Force Outstanding
Unit Award (AFOUA) with two devices, Global War on Terrorism Service
Medal, Air Force Good Conduct Medal (AFGCM) with one device, Armed
Forces Expeditionary Medal with one device.
The applicant was honorably discharged on 2 November 2005 in the grade
of staff sergeant. He served six years of active duty service.
In a letter dated 17 January 2006, HQ ARPC/DPSDD1 requested the
applicant provide clarification regarding the medal he requested and
to provide a copy of the orders awarding the medal.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ ARPC/PSD recommends the requested relief be denied. HQ ARPC/PSD
states there is no such medal as the Unit Meritorious Citation Medal.
They attempted to contact the applicant to clarify exactly what medal
he was referring to and to provide a copy of the orders awarding the
medal. The applicant did not respond. HQ APRC/PSD further states
without proper documentation the applicant’s request cannot be
accomplished.
A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, 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
28 April 2006, for review and response 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 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 requested his records be corrected to reflect he was awarded
the Unit Meritorious Citation Medal. The office of primary
responsibility informed the applicant that the medal he requested did
not exist and further requested him to clarify what medal he wishes to
be awarded. They also requested he provide a copy of the orders
awarding the medal. The applicant did not respond. In view of the
foregoing, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board
finds no basis to grant the requested relief.
_________________________________________________________________
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-
2006-00108 in Executive Session on 6 June 2006, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. James W. Russell III, Panel Chair
Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member
Mr. Elwood C. Lewis III, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 Jan 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, HQ ARPC/PSDD1, 17 Jan 06.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ ARPC/PSD dated 6 Mar 06.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Apr 06.
JAMES W. RUSSELL III
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00996
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00996 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 3 OCTOBER 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Gallant Unit Citation (GUC), Meritorious Unit Award (MUA), Air Force Outstanding Unit Award (AFOUA), Afghanistan Campaign Medal (ACM), Iraq Campaign Medal (ICM), and the Global...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03150
On 14 December 2005, HQ APFC/DPPPR informed the applicant that he was recommended for the BSM but the approval authority disapproved the recommendation on 16 July 1992 and that his records will be amended to remove the BSM from his DD Form 214. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends the applicant’s request for award of the BSM be denied. Although the BSM is listed on the applicant’s DD Form 214, the special order...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03558
All elements of a DFC for heroism approved (certificate dated) between 18 September 1947 to 2 June 2004 will not be reaccomplished to reflect “Valor”; nonetheless, individuals with these DFCs are authorized to the wear the “V” device.” _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR states the applicant was awarded the DFC for extraordinary achievement and not heroism. Therefore, they recommend the applicant’s request for the “V” device...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00836
___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends the applicant’s request be denied, and states, in part, the applicant was deployed in support of ONW and OEF, while assigned to Incirlik Air Base, Turkey, from December 2000 to March 2002. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit F. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Under the heading...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00218
He received the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award with “V” device for his 2005 deployment, and the Air Force Expeditionary Service Medal (AFESM) with Gold Border, which proves he was in a hostile environment. They advise the Army CAB may be awarded to any soldier after 18 September 2001 performing duties in an area where hostile fire pay or imminent danger pay is authorized, who is personally present and actively engaged or engaged by the enemy. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02016
The complete DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In his response dated 2 October 2006, the applicant reiterates his earlier contentions and submits a trip report that was not submitted with his initial application (Exhibit E). After a thorough review of the available records, we found no evidence that the applicant is eligible for the award of the ICM or ACM medals. Exhibit B....
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02340
The complete HQ AFPC/DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 25 Aug 06 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). The OER for the following period, 20 Aug 68 - 14 Aug 69, reported the member had been awarded the DFC for heroism, as well as AMs with 1- 7OLCs. Neither the applicant’s submission nor her...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00551
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends the applicant’s request for award of the PH be denied. 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 and counsel on 5 May 2006, for review and response. Furthermore, there is no...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03714
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03714 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 8 Jun 08 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Antarctic Expeditionary Medal listed on his DD Form 214 should have been the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (AFEM). ...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02017
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...