Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-02069
Original file (BC-2008-02069.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-02069
            INDEX NUMBER: 107.00

      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to reflect award of the Air Medal.

_________________________________________________________________

THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Based on his service during the period of  1  April  1964  through  20 March
1966, he was awarded the Air Medal.  In spite of having the certificate  and
citation for the award in his possession, it  was  never  reflected  in  his
military personnel records.  He can obtain  sworn  statements  from  six  or
more former members who served with him during this period.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a personal statement and a  copy
of the certificate and citation for the AM.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air  Force  on  12  June  1962  for  a
period of four years.  He was progressively promoted to the rank  of  airman
first class (A1C/E-4) with a date of rank of 1 October 1965.  He  served  as
a Voice Interceptor Operator Specialist, with an  assignment  with  the  Air
Force Security Services.  He successfully  completed  the  Russian  Language
Course and a tour in Germany from 27 March 1964 until  his  discharge.   His
Enlisted Record and Report of Separation, issued in conjunction with his  24
March 1966 release from active duty, reflects that he was  awarded  the  Air
Force Good Conduct Medal.

The Air Medal is awarded to U.S. and civilian personnel for single  acts  of
heroism or meritorious achievements while  participating  in  aerial  flight
and foreign military personnel in actual combat in support of operations.
Required achievement is  less  than  that  required  for  the  Distinguished
Flying Cross, but must be accomplished with  distinction  above  and  beyond
that expected of professional airmen. It  is  not  awarded  for  peace  time
sustained operational activities and flights.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPSIDR recommends  denial,  stating,  in  part,  they  informed  the
applicant of what document (special order) was needed  to  validate  his  AM
certificate and citation.  However, he did not provide  the  special  order.
They were unable to verify the  applicant’s  entitlement  to  the  requested
award without the special order.

The HQ AFPC/DPSIDR 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  16
September 2008 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this  date,  no
response has been received by this office (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

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  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,
should the applicant provide additional documentation, to include a copy  of
the special order or statements from his former commander and supervisor  to
substantiate his claim, we would be inclined to reconsider his  request  for
award of the AM.  In view of the above, and in the absence  of  evidence  to
the contrary, we find no 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  Docket  Number  BC-2008-02069
in Executive Session on 11 June 2009, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
      Ms. Martha J. Evans, Member
      Mr. James W. Russell III, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 27 May 08, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSIDR, 16 Sep 08.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Sep 08.




                                   MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-04145

    Original file (BC-2008-04145.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-04145 INDEX NUMBER: 107.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His WG AGO Form 53-55, Enlisted Record and Report of Separation, issued in conjunction with his honorable discharge on 29 November 1945, reflect his Air Medal that he was previously awarded. The applicant’s WG AGO 53-55...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-04138

    Original file (BC-2008-04138.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Based on the Eighth Air Force established policy of awarding a DFC upon the completion of 35 combat missions, he is entitled to the award. Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. No official documentation was provided or located that verifies the DFC being awarded to the applicant; or a written recommendation submitted requesting consideration for the DFC.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00219

    Original file (BC-2009-00219.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    In 1943, General “Hap” Arnold ordered theater commanders not to award the AM or DFC based solely on the number of combat missions completed, but rather for acts of heroism in combat flight or extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight. In this respect, the available evidence of record reflects the applicant completed a total of 35 combat missions while assigned to the Eighth Air Force as a B-17 pilot. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant’s Member of Congress, dated 23 Mar 09, w/atchs.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-04104

    Original file (BC-2008-04104.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-04104 INDEX NUMBER: 107.00 XXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her late father’s records be corrected to reflect award of the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC). Although the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) Awards and Decorations Board could not process the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03475

    Original file (BC-2007-03475.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial of the applicant's request for the AFGCM. Other than his own assertions, the applicant has provided no documentary evidence that would establish his entitlement to the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-00460

    Original file (BC-2008-00460.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: After separating from the Air Force he was not issued a DD Form 214. After a thorough review of the available evidence and the applicant’s complete submission, we find no evidence which would persuade us that his records should be corrected to show he was awarded the SAEMR. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 March 2008.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-01480

    Original file (BC-2007-01480.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01480 INDEX CODE: 107.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214 be corrected to reflect award of the Air Force Combat Action Medal (AFCAM). ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIDR was advised on 20 November 2007...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-02399

    Original file (BC-2007-02399.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    It also recognizes single acts of merit or meritorious service if the achievement or service is of a lesser degree than that deemed worthy of the Legion of Merit; but such service must have been accomplished with distinction. The timeline for submitting a decoration is two years from the date of the act or achievement. 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 office of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02560

    Original file (BC-2007-02560.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a through review of the applicant's military record, DPSIDR was unable to locate documentation which verified he was qualified or awarded the SAEMR. Other than his own assertions, the applicant has provided no documentary evidence that would establish his entitlement to the Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon with Bronze Service Star; therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-03898

    Original file (BC-2008-03898.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial, noting there are no special order, recommendation, proposed citation, or any other evidence provided by the applicant or located within his limited official military personnel file to support that he was submitted for the AM. All military decorations require a recommendation from a recommending official within the member’s chain of command at the time of the act or...