RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00524
				INDEX CODE:  107.00
				COUNSEL:  None

				HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her DD Form 214 be corrected to reflect award of Southwest Asia Service Medal (SWASM), Kuwait Medal for the Liberation of Kuwait and or Saudi Arabia’s Kuwait Liberation Medal for her participation in Desert Shield/Desert Storm.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Due to her being discharged early for pregnancy, she did not receive the medals when they were issued.  Many people in the 60th APS spent time in Saudi Arabia delivering supplies for the mission.  They were never there long enough for a short tour.  She would like to receive any medals for which she is authorized for this period.  She also supported Humanitarian missions.

Applicant's complete submission, with an attachment, is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 27 October 1987 for a period of four years.

Her DD Form 214 reflects she was awarded the Air Force Good Conduct Medal (AFGCM), USAF NCO PME Graduate Ribbon, National Defense Service Medal (NDSM), Air Force Training Ribbon, Air Force Longevity Service Award Ribbon, and Air Force Outstanding Unit Award (AFOUA) with one Oak Leaf Cluster (OLC).  The DD Form 214, Item 18, Remarks reflects the applicant served from 2 August 1990 to 13 April 1993 in support of Operation Desert Shield/Storm.

On 17 March 2004, AFPC/DPRFQ requested the applicant provide additional documentation showing she participated in Desert Shield/Desert Storm to include travel vouchers or deployment orders.  The applicant did not respond.

The applicant was honorably released from active duty on 13 April 1993 due to Pregnancy and transferred to the Reserve of the Air Force.  She served 5 years, 5 months and 17 days of active service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPRFQ states the applicant did not respond to the request to provide documentation to reflect her deployment in support of Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm.  Therefore, DPRFQ recommends denying the requested relief.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 7 May 2004, for review and response.  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 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 the recommendation of the Air Force and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or an injustice.  The applicant was requested to provide a copy of her travel voucher or deployment orders to show she was TDY or deployed in support of Desert Shield/Desert Storm.  The applicant did not respond.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2004-00524 in Executive Session on 15 June 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated Feb 04, w/atch.
	Exhibit B.	Letter, AFPC/DPRFQ, dated 3 May 04, w/atch.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 May 04.

				Panel Chair