RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 		DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01547

				COUNSEL:  NONE

				HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty, be corrected to reflect the following Air Force 
Occupational Badge, Qualification Badge, and Medals:

	a.  Communications Occupational Badge (Administratively 
approved)

      	b.  Combat Crewmember Qualification Badge

	c.  Bosnia Combat Medal

	d.  Croatia Combat Medal

      	e.  Serbia Combat Medal
      
      	f.  North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Medal with 
one Bronze Service Star

	g.  Cold War Medal


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His DD Form 214 does not accurately reflect his Air Force 
Occupational and Qualification Badges.  It also does not reflect 
all of his Air Force Medals earned throughout his career.

He served as a Telecommunications Operations Specialist for 2 
years and earned his five skill level before retraining into 
Airborne Communications Systems career field.  This fact should 
qualify him to wear the Communications Occupational Badge; 
however, this badge does not appear on his DD Form 214. 

Once he became airborne qualified and flew thirty missions 
against potentially hostile Soviet aircraft and earned an Air 
Medal, his commanding officer presented him with the Combat 
Crewmember Qualification Badge; however, this badge does not 
appear on his DD Form 214.  

During his career he was presented with 2 NATO Medals for his 
service in Kosovo and Bosnia; however, these are not reflected 
on his DD Form 214.  He was also present in Serbia and believes 
there are multiple decorations from that region missing from his 
records. 

In support of this request, the applicant provided copies of two 
DD Form 214s, a copy of a NATO Medal Award Certificate, copy of 
a Meritorious Service Medal Citation as proof of service in the 
Bosnia, Croatia and Serbia theaters of combat operations.

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 1 Oct 
78.

On 30 Apr 99, the applicant retired and was credited with 20 
years, 1 month, and 29 days of active service.   

His DD Form 214 reflects the following Decoration, Medals, 
Badges, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized.

	- Meritorious Service Medal with two Oak Leave Clusters
	- Air Medal
      - Aerial Achievement Medal with Oak Leaf Cluster
	- Air Force Commendation Medal
      - Air Force Achievement Medal
      - National Defense Service Medal
      - Humanitarian Service Medal
      - Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon / Pistol
      - Combat Readiness Medal with three Oak Leaf Clusters
      - NATO Medal
      - Air Force Good Conduct Medal with five Oak Leaf Clusters
      - Joint Meritorious Unit Award with four Oak Leaf Clusters
      - Armed Forces Service Medal
      - Military Outstanding Volunteer Service Medal
      - Air Force Training Ribbon
      - Air Force Longevity Service Award with three Oak Leaf 
Clusters
      - Air Force Outstanding Unit Award with five Oak Leaf 
Clusters
      - NCO Professional Military Education Ribbon with Oak Leaf 
Cluster 
      - Air Force Overseas Ribbon (Long Tour) with Oak Leaf 
Cluster  

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


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or an injustice.  

The Combat Crewmember Qualification Badge was established on 1 
Sep 64 and then eliminated in Aug 93.  This was done under the 
auspices of addressing uniform accoutrements to eliminate 
duplication, achieve standardization, and promote an uncluttered 
appearance.  Therefore, the applicant is not authorized to wear 
this qualification badge. 

After a review of the applicant’s official military record they 
confirmed he served as a Telecommunications Operation Specialist 
for more than 2 years; therefore, he is authorized to wear the 
Communications Occupational Badge.  Upon final Board decision, 
administrative correction of the applicants’ record will be 
completed by AFPC/DPSOR.

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

AFPC/DPSID recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or an injustice.  

The applicant provided a NATO issued certificate awarding him 
the NATO Medal-Yugoslavia for his service in support of 
Operation JOINT ENDEAVOR.  They did not locate any official 
documentation, nor did the applicant provide any, to verify he 
served in direct support of any additional NATO operation for 
which a NATO Medal is authorized.  Although the applicant served 
in support of Operation DENY FLIGHT, this operation also falls 
under the NATO Medal-Yugoslavia and therefore would not be an 
additional award as the applicant already received recognition 
of this NATO Medal.  

The Cold War Medal is not an official award of the United States 
Air Force or Department of Defense

Based on their review of the applicant’s official military 
personnel records, they have determined that the below Air Force 
Medals and/or Ribbons should have been awarded:

	- Air Force Outstanding Unit Award with one Silver Oak Leaf 
Cluster and three Bronze Oak Leaf Clusters
	- Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal
	- Armed Forces Service Medal with one Bronze Service Star

Upon final Board decision, administrative correction of the 
applicants’ record will be completed by AFPC/DPSOR.

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


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In support of his request, the applicant provided copies of his 
United States Air Force Flying History Report which show his 
combat time and support while assigned to the 67th Special 
Operations Squadron.  He also included copies of his Military 
Flight Log which provided the date of each mission, aircraft 
tail number and location of takeoff and landing.  


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, to include his 
rebuttal comments, in judging the merits of the case; however, 
we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force 
offices of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt their 
rationale as the basis for our conclusion that relief beyond 
that already granted administratively is not warranted.  
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-2014-01547 in Executive Session on 2 Jun 15 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-01547 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Apr 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 12 Jan 15.
	Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSID, dated 16 Feb 15.
      	Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Apr 15.
      	Exhibit F.  Applicant’s Letter, dated 13 Apr 15.