Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05163
Original file (BC 2013 05163.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
         RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-05163

 			COUNSEL:  NONE

			HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of 
Transfer or Discharge, be corrected to reflect he was awarded the 
Combat Air Medal.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was awarded the Combat Air Medal in February 1970.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a letter from a 
former service member and Special Order G-173.

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is a former member of the Air Force who served from 
12 September 1966 through 11 September 1970.

Upon review of his records, AFPC/DPSID verified the applicant’s 
entitlement to the Air Force Commendation Medal, Vietnam Service 
Medal, Air Force Longevity Service Award and the Republic of 
Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm.  His records will be updated 
accordingly upon final Board action.


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of the Air Medal.  The Air Medal is 
governed by Executive Order 9158 which authorizes the Secretary of 
a Military Department to award any person, while serving in any 
capacity with the United States, subsequent to 8 September 1939, 
who distinguishes himself or herself by meritorious achievement 
while participating in aerial flight.  The Air Medal may be 
awarded for combat or non-combat action in recognition of single 
acts of valor, heroism or merit while participating in aerial 
flight.  Additionally, it may be conferred for sustained 
meritorious achievement (distinction) in the performance of duties 
involving aerial flight.

There is no official documentation verifying the applicant was 
recommended for, or awarded the Air Medal.  While the applicant 
has submitted a statement in support of his request, there is no 
evidence in his record, nor did he present any official 
documentation to support his request.  

The complete AFPC/DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C.

SAF/MRBP recommends denial of the Air Medal.  After a review of 
the applicant’s record, SAF/MRBP concurs with AFPC/DPSID’s 
recommendation to deny the applicant’s request.  Should the 
applicant locate any flight records, Air Medal citation or order, 
he can submit those documents for consideration.  

The complete SAF/MRBP evaluation is at Exhibit D.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 3 July 2014 (Exhibit E) 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 an 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 offices of primary responsibility 
(OPR) and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion 
the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice.  
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find 
relief beyond what has been administratively corrected is not 
warranted.


THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2013-05163 in Executive Session on 26 August 2014, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	

Although,       chaired the panel, in view of her retirement,    
has signed as Acting Panel Chair.  The following documentary 
evidence was considered:

Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 11 Nov 13, w/atchs.
Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Record Excerpts.
Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 28 Feb 14.
Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBP, dated 9 May 14.
Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Jul 14.


						






Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02307

    Original file (BC 2013 02307.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of the applicant’s request for the AM, PUC, Air Force Overseas Ribbon and the AFEM. There is no documentation to support the applicant’s unit of assignment, with inclusive dates, was awarded the PUC. Since the applicant served before this time period, he is not eligible for award of the Air Force Overseas Ribbon.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01718

    Original file (BC 2013 01718.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends the Air Force Decorations Board advise on whether the applicant’s recommendation package would have been approved at the time of the act or achievement. The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C. SAF/MRBP recommends approval. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBP, dated 7 Oct 2013.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05097

    Original file (BC 2012 05097.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    A complete copy of the SAF/MRBP evaluation is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reiterates his argument that he would have been selected for promotion to master sergeant if credited with the Air Medal. As for the applicant’s request that he be promoted to the grade of master sergeant (E-7), in view of the fact that we have determined there is no basis to recommend granting the AM, we find...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04289

    Original file (BC 2013 04289.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Fourth, any criteria set by the War Department are just not applicable to this case. The OER is clearly an official record, and it clearly states that the decedent had been recommended for a DFC. This case is not like others where the applicant seeks the award of a DFC where the only evidence was the applicant's statement that he was told by his commander that he would be recommended for a DFC.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05328

    Original file (BC 2012 05328.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05328 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect he was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC). ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His WD AGO Form 53-98, Military Record and Report of Separation...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05128

    Original file (BC 2013 05128.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05128 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C, D and E. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial indicating...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03719

    Original file (BC 2013 03719.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Per AFM 900-3, Decorations, Service Awards, Unit Awards, Special Badges, Favorable Communications, Certificates, and Special Devices (20 Jan 72), Chapter 3, Paragraph 3-1(3), “Only one decoration may be awarded for the same act, achievement or period of service.” Further, per AFM 900-3, and AFI 36-2803, Air Force Awards and Decorations Program, criteria for award of the BSM is for “Heroic or meritorious achievement or service (not involving aerial flight).” The complete MRBP evaluation is at...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01584

    Original file (BC-2013-01584.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Other than the air assault missions and the courier flights, all missions should have been recorded by the 361st TEWS. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force, which is at Exhibit C and D. ________________________________________________________________ _ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial stating they were unable to locate any official documentation that verifies he was...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02456

    Original file (BC 2014 02456.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. The DMSM will not be awarded for any period of service for which a Military Department medal is awarded. The applicant was recommended for a DMSM, not a BSM.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01251

    Original file (BC 2014 01251.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01251 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC), with one Bronze Oak Leaf Cluster. The applicant’s WD AGD Form 53-55, Enlisted Record and Report of Separation – Honorable Discharge, reflects the award of the following Medals and/or Ribbons: - Distinguished Flying Cross - Air Medal with three Bronze Clusters -...