Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-04062
Original file (BC-2007-04062.doc) Auto-classification: Denied






                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-04062
            INDEX CODE:  107.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be awarded the Gold or Silver Life-Saving Medal (G/S-LSM).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The military never  awarded  him  a  decoration  for  his  life-saving
actions in 2006.

In support of his request, the applicant submits a  Thank  You  Letter
from  American  Airlines  and  a  copy   of   an   American   Airlines
Transportation Voucher Exchange Coupon.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Air Force on 7 Jun 00,  for  a  term  of
four years and was  progressively  promoted  to  the  grade  of  staff
sergeant.  He was disability discharged with severance  pay  on  7 May
07, for chronic low back pain due to degenerative  disc  disease,  and
received an honorable discharge service characterization.  He served a
total of 6 years, 11 months and 1 day active duty service.

His DD 214 reflects award of the  Air  Force  Achievement  Medal,  the
National Defense Service medal, the Air Force Good Conduct  Medal  and
the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial, and states, in part, that the  GLSM  is
awarded for heroic conduct at the risk of life during  the  rescue  or
attempted rescue of a victim of drowning or shipwreck.   The  SLSM  is
awarded under the same conditions as the GLSM.  The applicant did  not
provide official documentation that verifies his heroic  act,  and  no
official documentation was located to support award of  the  requested
medal.

The complete 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
18 Jan 08, 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 his request, nor does the evidence
of record reflect his eligibility for the requested awards.  Should he
provide official documentation to  support  his  entitlement  to  this
award, the Board would be willing to reconsider his request.  In  view
of the above, 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.  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-
04062 in Executive Session on 4 Mar 08, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

                 Mr. James W. Russell III, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Teri G. Spoutz, Member
                 Mr. Garry G. Sauner, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 Dec 07, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Memo, AFPC/DPSIDR, dated 7 Jan 08.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Jan 08.






      JAMES W. RUSSELL
      Panel Chair




Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-00001

    Original file (BC-2012-00001.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00001 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Airman’s Medal (AmnM) instead of the Air Force Commendation Medal for saving the life of an active duty dependent. _______________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: According to the applicant’s...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-01041

    Original file (BC-2009-01041.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial and states, in part, that although it appears the applicant may have a credible claim, without any verifiable documentation within his military records to indicate that he was formally recommended, or awarded the DFC for the events that occurred on 13 November 1952, they must recommend disapproval based on the guidelines of Section 526 of the Fiscal Year 1996 National Defense...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03248

    Original file (BC-2006-03248.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    DPPPWB advises that Air Force promotion policy dictates the closeout date of a decoration must be on or before the Promotion Eligibility Cutoff Date (PECD) and the signature date of the DÉCOR-6, Request for Decoration Printout (RDP), must be before the date of selections for a cycle in question. Should the decoration be upgraded and the applicant promoted to the grade of MSgt with a date of rank (DOR) of 1 Sep 89, DPPPWB recommends the Board adjust the applicant’s retirement date to 31 Aug...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2007-02598

    Original file (BC-2007-02598.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    DPSIDR states, in part, that after a thorough review of the applicant’s great-uncle’s military record, they are unable to find supporting documentation to indicate he was recommended for the award of the SS or DFC. Unfortunately, the applicant cannot recommend his great- uncle for award of the SS or the DFC. WAYNE R. GRACIE Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2007-02598 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00095

    Original file (BC-2009-00095.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    DPSIDR states the applicant does not provide any documentation proving he was awarded the BSM w/1 OLC. DPSIDR notes the Belgian Congo was not considered to be an opposing armed enemy force of the United States. After a thorough review of the available evidence and applicant’s complete submission, we find no evidence the applicant’s records should be corrected to show he was awarded the PH w/1OLC or BSM w/1OLC.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03607

    Original file (BC-2011-03607.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant subsequently sought out his commander at the time to request he be recommended for award of the LOM for his distinguished actions in the mission to rescue the American captive. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIDR evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In response to the advisory opinion, the applicant provides signed, dated, and notarized recommendation for award of the LOM, as...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00530

    Original file (BC-2008-00530.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    The AFPC/DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant offers corrections to the cited time-period he served on active duty, the number of tours with extensions he served in the Vietnam Theater of Operations (Thailand), and his Primary (PAFSC) and Duty (DAFSC) Air Force Specialty Codes. However, although the applicant contends he was told that he was nominated for award of the AmnM...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02201

    Original file (BC-2007-02201.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02201 INDEX CODE: 107.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect entitlement to the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award with “V” device and 3 Oak Leaf Clusters (AFOUA w/V & 3OLC), Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal (RVNCM), the Combat Crew...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2005-02810

    Original file (BC-2005-02810.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    His records be corrected to reflect entitlement to the Combat Readiness Medal (CRM) and the Basic Military Training Honor Graduate Ribbon (BMTHGR). He is determined to pursue a military career with the ARNG, and would like to demonstrate to them that his service in the USAF was ultimately considered honorable. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial of the applicant’s request for award of the CRM and BMTHGR.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-01113

    Original file (BC-2008-01113.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were sent to the applicant on 9 May and 16 Jun 08, respectively, for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, this office has received no response. Therefore, 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...