Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05375
Original file (BC 2013 05375.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05375

					COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  Her Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) First Oak Leaf Cluster (OLC), dated 10 Sep 09, be removed from her record and replaced with the Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) Second OLC, dated 3 Nov 10. (Administratively resolved)

2.  The AF Form 973, Air Force Request and Authorization for Change of Administrative Orders, revoking her AFCM be removed from her military records.  



APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her servicing Military Personnel Flight (MPF) failed to properly resolve this issue. 

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



STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant served in the Regular Air Force in the grade of major (O-4) during the matter under review. 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C and D.



AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSID does not make a recommendation.  The applicant was awarded the AFCM (1OLC) per special order G-413, dated 10 Sep 09.  The original award approval authority has since revoked this decoration and AFPC/DPSID removed the medal from the Military Personnel Data System (MilPDS), per AF Form 973, Special Order G-197.  The applicant has subsequently been awarded the MSM (2OLC) per Special Order I-066, dated 3 Nov 10.  The record has been corrected.   

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPSIR recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice.  The applicant is requesting the removal of the AF Form 973, dated 26 Feb 14, directing the revocation of her AFCM.  However, this source document needs to remain in her ARMS record in the event another copy of the revoked award turns up.  Without the source document, the award would be inappropriately reloaded into the member’s permanent record, creating the same problem being addressed today.  

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIR evaluation is at Exhibit D.



APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 21 Jul 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E).  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 timely filed.

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 AFPC/DPSIR and adopt its 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 no basis to recommend granting the requested relief.



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-2013-05375 in Executive Session on 23 Oct 14 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair 
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 14 Nov 13, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSID, dated 24 Mar 14.
Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIR, dated 25 Jun 14.
Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Jul 14.

						










3





FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY – PRIVACY ACT OF 1974


FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY – PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
1

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY – PRIVACY ACT OF 1974


FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY – PRIVACY ACT OF 1974
1

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00269

    Original file (BC-2009-00269.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial of the AFCM, 1OLC, indicating that based on the applicant’s military record and provided documentation, they were able to verify her entitlement to the AFEM for time served in Kuwait and the AFCM, Basic, based on Special Order GA-07. The complete AFPC/DPSIDR evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05363

    Original file (BC 2013 05363.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    (Administratively Corrected) APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was awarded the aforementioned medals; however, they are not reflected on her DD Form 214. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends approval of the applicant’s request to add the MSM to her DD Form 214. Therefore, in addition to the administrative corrections to add the AFCM and the SWASM to his record, we recommend the applicant's records be corrected as set forth below.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00740

    Original file (BC 2013 00740.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The complete DPALL evaluations, dated 15 May 2013 and 27 March 2013, are at Exhibits C and D. AFPC/DPSID defers to the Air Force Decoration Board on whether the applicant’s actions merit award of the MSM, 2 OLC. f. Providing his corrected record, to include the PRF reflecting an overall promotion recommendation of “DP,” promotion consideration by an SSB for the CY10A Lt Col CSB. d. He be awarded the MSM, 2 OLC, for meritorious service during the period from 25 November 2008 to 30 November...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00369

    Original file (BC 2014 00369.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00369 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty be corrected to reflect the Meritorious Service Medal (MSM). THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01266

    Original file (BC-2013-01266.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01266 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 the following: a. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802041

    Original file (9802041.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Her request for senior rater endorsement on the EPR should not be granted at this time. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and provides the wing commander’s concurrence of her request for senior rater indorsement. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice to warrant amending the MSM citation to include...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | bc-2011-00217

    Original file (bc-2011-00217.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    In support of his request, he provides two personal memoranda, dated 22 Mar 10 and 11 Feb 12; letters of support from his Commander during the specified tour of duty, dated 20 Jan 10 and 25 Jan 12; letter of support from the Squadron’s Operations Officer, dated 5 Oct 10; Evaluation Reports and Appeals Board (ERAB) decision to rescind the EPR (case#2812143), dated 30 Nov 10; second request for AFCM, 1 OLC re-instatement, dated 11 Feb 12; and justification memorandum from the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01159

    Original file (BC 2014 01159.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s DD Form 214 reflects the award of the following Air Force Medals and/or Ribbons: - Air Force Commendation Medal - National Defense Service Medal The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. The applicant provided a...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05779

    Original file (BC 2013 05779.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05779 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C and D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial of the applicant’s request to change his grade to SSgt on his DD...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2002-00614-2

    Original file (BC-2002-00614-2.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    In letters, dated 11 November 2003 and 10 February 2004, the applicant requests the AFCM, 3 OLC, be upgraded to the MSM, 2 OLC, and consideration for promotion to the grade of lieutenant colonel by an SSB for the P0501B board. Applicant’s complete submissions, with attachments, are at Exhibits K and L. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR recommends the Board make the determination concerning the applicant’s request to upgrade...