RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-03365
            INDEX CODE:  107.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His  record  be  corrected  to  show  the  award  of  the  Air   Force
Commendation Medal (AFCM).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

An Air Force Form IMT 642, Air Force Commendation Medal  Justification
Form, was submitted in July 2002 and re-submitted in October  2005  to
the 133rd Airlift Wing  (AW)  of  the  Minnesota  Air  National  Guard
(MNANG).  No action was taken and he has not received the  AFCM.   The
Wing had indicated to him that they would publish the order.

In support of his appeal, the  applicant  has  provided  copies  of  a
completed AFF IMT 642, a citation to accompany the award of the  AFCM,
and other personnel-related paperwork.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On or about 9 September 2002, the applicant, a former  member  of  the
Minnesota Air National Guard (MNANG), admitted in a written  statement
to the Air Force Office of  Special  Investigations  (AFOSI)  that  he
forged an official government document.  On 13 September 2002, he  was
officially barred from entering his installation.  He eventually  pled
guilty to and was convicted of one count of Making a  False  Statement
by United States District Court in Minnesota.  On 6 November 2002,  he
was notified by  his  commander  of  his  intent  to  administratively
discharge him from the MNANG for Misconduct; specifically  intentional
misrepresentation of facts in official statement or records; and other
serious or recurring misconduct that raises  doubt  regarding  fitness
for retention in the Air Force, regardless of whether such  misconduct
has resulted in judicial or nonjudicial punishment.   He  acknowledged
receipt of the Letter of Notification (LON) on 14 November  2002.   He
waived his right  to  make  an  appearance  before  an  administrative
discharge board but retained  the  right  to  counsel  and  to  submit
statements.  On 29 May 2003, he was sentenced to probation  for  three
years and ordered to serve two consecutive 48-hour jail terms as  well
as pay a $100 assessment and a $5000 fine.  On  3  November  2003,  he
applied for transfer to the Retired Reserve.  On 20 November 2003,  he
waived his right to an administrative discharge board and declined  to
submit statements on his behalf.  The Minnesota Adjutant  General  and
the commander of  the  MNANG  both  recommended  his  application  for
transfer to the Air Force Reserve be disapproved.  However, should the
SECAF   approve   the   transfer,   they   recommended   his   service
characterization  be  characterized  as   General,   Under   Honorable
Conditions.  HQ NGB forwarded the case  to  HQ  USAF/JA  for  a  legal
review.  On 10 January 2004, he was issued  a  Referral  OPR  for  the
period 1 September 2002 through 31 August 2003 wherein his  conviction
was noted as the statement that  he  made  no  impact  on  the  unit’s
mission during the reporting period.  On 19 May 2004, he  applied  for
transfer to the 934th Airlift Wing of the US Air Force  Reserve.   His
commander denied the request by  the  Secretary  of  the  Air  Force’s
(SECAF’s) resolution of his application for transfer  to  the  Retired
Reserve.  On 29 June 2004,  HQ  USAF/JAG  found  his  package  legally
sufficient and recommended he be transferred to  the  Retired  Reserve
with the caveat that the SECAF determine his retirement grade.  On  22
March 2005, the SECAF found he had not served  satisfactorily  in  the
grade of major within the meaning of Section 1370(d)  (1),  Title  10,
United States Code (U.S.C.).  The Secretary did find however, that  he
served satisfactorily in the grade of captain.  The  SECAF  therefore,
directed he be transferred to the Retired  Reserve  in  the  grade  of
captain.  He was transferred to the Retired Reserve  awaiting  pay  at
age  60 effective  22  March  2005  after  having  served  20   years,
10 months, and 21 days.
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

NGB/A1P0F recommends denial and they note the  MNANG  also  recommends
denial of his request for the  AFCM.   After  careful  review  of  the
supplied  documents,  A1P0F  has  not  been  able  to   verify   their
authenticity and contact with his unit has indicated the AFF  IMT  642
and the citation to accompany the award of the AFCM  provided  by  the
applicant did not originate within the 133AW.   It  appears  the  time
period noted on the AFF IMT 642 was during 2002 when the applicant was
working with the ANG Crisis Action Team (CAT) at  the  National  Guard
Bureau (NGB).

A1P0F’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________





APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Based on the A1P0F advisory’s statement his  paperwork  could  not  be
authenticated, applicant has provided several attachments he considers
supporting evidence to his claim for award of the AFCM.

Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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.   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
National  Guard  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.   Not  only  could  the
authenticity of the commendation medal request be determined, it  also
appears the citation lists a timeframe when the  applicant  served  at
the ANG Crisis Action Team at the NGB and not at his unit.  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-
2006-03365 in Executive Session on 10 April 2007, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

      Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
      Ms. Josephine L. Davis, Member
      Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member




The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 Oct 06, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records..
    Exhibit C.  Letter, NGB/A1POF, dated 26 Dec 06.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 Mar 07.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 7 Feb 07.




                                   CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
                                   Panel Chair