Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01268
Original file (BC-2007-01268.doc) Auto-classification: Denied






                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-01268
            INDEX CODE:  107.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NONE

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  25 OCT 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her records be corrected to  show  she  was  awarded  the  Meritorious
Service Medal, the Air Force Good Conduct Medal,  the  Southwest  Asia
Service Medal,  the  Air  Force  Short  Tour  Ribbon,  the  Air  Force
Professional  Military  Education  Graduation   Ribbon,   the   Kuwait
Liberation Medal, the Air Force  Service  Occupation  Badge,  the  Air
Force Small  Arms  Expert  Marksmanship  Ribbon,  and  the  Air  Force
Training Ribbon.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She is entitled to these awards  based  on  new  information  she  has
obtained.

In support of her request, the applicant submits the criteria for each
requested medal, a copy of NGB Form 22, Department of the Army and the
Air Force National Guard Bureau Report of  Separation  and  Record  of
Service, and excerpts from her military personnel records.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Air National Guard of Ohio on  5 Sep 85,
for a term of four years and was progressively promoted to  the  grade
of  airman  first  class.   She  was  discharged  on  23 Jan 91,   for
enlistment in another state.  She received an honorable discharge  and
an eligible reenlistment eligibility code.

She enlisted in the Air National Guard of California on 24 Jul 91,  in
the grade of sergeant and was released on  23 Jan 92.   She  served  a
total of 6 years, 4 months and 19 days military service.

The  applicant’s  separation  document  reflects  award  of  the  Army
Achievement Medal, the Army Service Ribbon, the  Air  Force  Longevity
Service Award, the Ohio Award of Merit  w/NUM  1,  the  Ohio  Faithful
Service Ribbon and the Ohio Basic Training Ribbon.

On 19 Jun 07, the applicant’s records were administratively  corrected
to reflect award of the National Defense Service Medal (NDSM).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

NGB/A1POF recommends denial.  A1POF  states,  that  according  to  the
applicant’s unit and based on the  documentation  she  provided,  more
evidence will be required before  her  entitlement  to  the  requested
awards can be verified.

The A1POF evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 8
Aug 07, for review and comment 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 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.  The applicant has not  submitted
persuasive evidence to substantiate her request, nor does the evidence
of record reflect her eligibility for the  requested  awards.   Should
she provide official documentation to support her entitlement to these
awards, the Board would be willing to  reconsider  her  request.   The
Board notes the applicant is entitled to the NDSM and her records were
administratively corrected to reflect this  award.   In  view  of  the
above, we agree with the opinions 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.  Therefore, we find no compelling basis to warrant
favorable consideration of 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-2007-
01268 in Executive Session on 10 October 2007, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. James W. Russell III, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member
                 Mr. Clarence R. Anderegg, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 Apr 07, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Letter, NGB/A1POF, dated 8 Aug 07, w/atch.
      Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Aug 07.





      JAMES W. RUSSELL
      Panel Chair





Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01621

    Original file (BC-2007-01621.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    After she filed a complaint through the Air National Guard Inspector General’s Office (ANG/IG) concerning abuse of authority by ANG/OM, the LOR was removed from her records. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: According to the Chief of Organizational Support, Air National Guard Readiness Center, the applicant, while serving in the Maryland ANG on a Title 10 United States Code active duty tour, received an LOR on 8 October 2002 for twice...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03109

    Original file (BC-2006-03109.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    In fact, due to an administrative error, she continued to serve beyond her MSD of 1 June 2006 and was only separated after the error was discovered. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant disagrees with NGB’s opinions and has provided numerous points of contention along with explanations for each. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant's submission, we can find no documented instance...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02518

    Original file (BC-2007-02518.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    A1POF states the date of enlistment is the last date the member enlisted with a component. An NGB Form was completed for the one year period. 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 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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02509

    Original file (BC-2005-02509.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    INDEX CODE: 110.02 BC-2005-02509 MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION OF APPLICATION BEFORE THE AFBCMR SUBJECT: Having carefully reviewed this application, we agree with the recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has been the victim of either an error or an injustice. Therefore, under the authority delegated in AFI 36-2603, the applicant's records will be corrected as set forth in the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2006-02972

    Original file (BC-2006-02972.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Furthermore, he can resubmit his application with specific documentation supporting his request and provide his current contact information. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that he should be given the requested relief. We therefore agree with the recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02973

    Original file (BC-2005-02973.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Applicant submitted a waiver to DFAS through her unit comptroller. We understand the need to provide receipts for lodging, which she did and that part of her debt was forgiven; however, a requirement to provide receipts, or proof, she used her per diem for that which it was intended seems, to us, to be excessive and unnecessary in this case. CHARLENE M. BRADLEY Panel Chair DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON DC [pic] Office Of The Assistant Secretary AFBCMR BC-2005-02973 MEMORANDUM FOR...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02597

    Original file (BC-2007-02597.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02597 INDEX CODE: 110.00, 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. We do not believe that the circumstances surrounding her discharge warrant correction of her RE code to 1J as she requests, but agree with the Air Force office of primary responsibility that since the RE code of 3A is...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00520

    Original file (BC-2006-00520.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _____________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPAPP recommends denial, indicating there are no documents in the applicant’s military personnel record, nor has she provided any, to show she was on any flights to Turkey. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03710

    Original file (BC-2006-03710.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    All supporting documentation stated he should have remained on a medical continuation MPA tour until the treating physicians released him to full military duty to include completing his physical therapy. His MPA days were being provided by Air Material Command (AMC). He was removed from MPA tour by a geographically separated, non medical provider who made a decision to return him to full military duty even after she had received proper documentation from two providers clearly stating he...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02322

    Original file (BC-2007-02322.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    She would like the Board to redress this situation and render a final decision that will allow for her immediate promotion to the rank of Lt Col, with an effective date of 9 September 2001, the date she was first eligible for promotion and assigned to an authorized Lt Col position. Since that date, she has not been selected for positions requiring the grade of Lt Col. ANG officers selected for promotion to Lt Col who are in a full-time Air Guard Reserve/Statutory Tour position, and not...