HEARING DESIRED: NO 

DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-02127 

 
COUNSEL:  NONE 
 

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 
 
 
IN THE MATTER OF:   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
Item 13 of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge 
from  Active  Duty,  be  corrected  to  reflect  award  of  the  Grenada 
Medal.   
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
He was assigned to the 96th Combat Support Group (CSG) at Dyess 
Air Force Base (AFB) Texas and the rest of the squadron received 
the  medal  but  he  did  not  receive  one  after  he  completed  his 
first enlistment with an honorable discharge.   
 
He  received  a  letter  from  the  Department  of  Veterans  Affairs 
(VA) which stated he must have two years of active duty service 
to receive the medal.  He earned the medal and needs it to get a 
job at his local VA Medical Center.   
 
The  applicant  did  not  submit  any  documents  in  support  of  his 
request.   
 
The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.  
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
According  to  documents  extracted  from  the  applicant’s  military 
personnel  records,  he  initially  enlisted  in  the  Regular  Air 
Force on 22 September 1982 and was progressively promoted to the 
grade of Senior Airman (SrA), E-4.  On 15 September 1986, he was 
released from active duty with an honorable characterization of 
service  and  credited  with  completing  3  years,  11  months,  and 
23 days  of  active  duty  service.    He  reenlisted  in  the  Regular 
Air  Force  for  his  second  tour  of  active  duty  on 
16 September 1986.    On  24  December  1987,  the  applicant  was 
discharged  with  a  general  (under  honorable  conditions) 
characterization  of  service  for  a  pattern  of  misconduct,  under 
the 
authority 
39-10, 
5-47, 
Administrative 

Air 
of 
Separation 

Force 
of 

Regulation 

Airmen, 

(AFR) 
paragraph, 

for 

of 

duty 

and 

dereliction 

specifically 
financial 
irresponsibility.    The  applicant  was  credited  with  1  year, 
3 months  and  9  days  of  active  duty  service  for  this  second 
period of enlistment. 
 
The applicant’s DD Form 214 does not reflect award of a Grenada 
Medal.   
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
HQ AFPC/DPSID recommends denial.  DPSID states there is no medal 
referred  to  as  the  “Grenada  Medal”.    However,  they  believe  the 
applicant is requesting award of the Armed Forces Expeditionary 
Medal  (AFEM)  for  service  in  support  of  operations  in  Grenada.  
The  AFEM  is  awarded  for  Operation  URGENT  FURY  in  Grenada  from 
23 October 1983 to 21 November 1983.  After a thorough review of 
the  applicant’s  official  military  personnel  record,  they  were 
unable  to  locate  any  official  documentation  verifying  the 
applicant’s service in Grenada or supporting Grenada operations.   
 
However,  based  on  their  review  of  the  applicant’s  official 
military  personnel  record,  they  were  able  to  determine  the 
Korean  Defense  Service  Medal  (KDSM)  should  have  been  awarded 
during  the  applicant’s  service  from  22  September  1982  to 
15 September 1986, and was not reflected in his records.   
 
The AFEM is awarded to members of the United States Armed Forces 
who,  after  1  July  1958  have  participated  in  a  United  States 
military operation and encountered foreign armed opposition, or 
were  in  danger  of  hostile  action  by  foreign  Armed  Forces.    As 
defined  by  DoD  Manual  1343.33,  a  member  must  be  engaged  in 
direct support for 30 consecutive days in the area of operations 
(or  for  a  full  period  when  an  operation  is  less  than  30  days 
duration)  or  for  60  nonconsecutive  days  provided  this  support 
involves  entering  the  area  of  operations.    In  addition,  direct 
support  is  defined  as  services  being  supplied  to  the  combat 
forces  in  the  area  of  operations  by  ground  units,  ships,  and 
aircraft  provided  it  involves  actually  entering  the  designated 
area.  That includes ships and aircraft providing fire, patrol, 
guard, reconnaissance, or other military support.   
 
The complete AFPC/DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
In an undated letter, the applicant reiterates he served in the 
96th CSG in support of Operation URGENT FURY.  He states his unit 
was  awarded  the  AFEM  but  he  was  told  he  could  not  receive  the 
medal  because  he  did  not  have  two  years  of  service  and  would 
receive the medal at the end of his enlistment.  The applicant 

 

indicates  he  finds  the  AFPC/DPSID  recommendation  offensive 
because  even  though  he  was  not  on  flying  status,  he  worked  in 
support  of  his  unit’s  mission.    His  job  was  to  support  the 
aircrew and they received the medal.  He feels an injustice will 
occur if he is not awarded the AFEM. 
 
The applicant’s complete response 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 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, to include his comments 
provided in rebuttal to the Air Force evaluation, 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.  The 
applicant  has  not  provided  any  documentary  evidence  to 
substantiate  his  claim  that  he  meets  the  criteria  for  award  of 
the AFEM; therefore, 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  this  application 
BC-2012-02127 in Executive Session on 1 November 2012, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 
 
 
 
 

, Panel Chair 
, Member 
, Member 

  
  
  

 

The  following  documentary  evidence  was  considered  for  BC-2012-
02127: 
 
    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149 dated 17 April 2012. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. 
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSID, dated 17 August 2012. 
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 August 2012. 
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, not dated.  
 

 

Panel Chair