RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03030 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His record be corrected to reflect he was awarded the Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon (SAEMR). ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The ribbon is not listed on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member of the Air Force who served from 9 September 1998 through 28 October 2002. AFPC/DPSID reviewed the applicant’s records and verified his entitlement to the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal and the Air Force Longevity Award. His records will be corrected accordingly upon completion of this case. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial. Along with his application, the applicant submitted an AF Form 522, USAF Ground Weapons Training Data. The AF Form 522 was forwarded to the USAF Combat Arms for guidance. According to the USAF Combat Arms Program Manager, the training programs that were in effect when the applicant completed training required the shooter to obtain 36 hits on target with 30 hits inside the 10 inch circle of the target to achieve “expert” status. The maximum possible score on the course was 36, which makes the 48 hits indicated on the AF Form 522 submitted by the applicant questionable. Additionally, the only acceptable entries in the status block were N/A, UQ (unqualified), Q (qualified) or E (expert). There was no guidance allowing “p” as indicated on the applicant’s AF Form 522. The documentation submitted by the applicant does not verify or support expert marksman status. Therefore, he is ineligible for the award the SAEMR. The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit B. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 27 August 2012, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit C). As of this date, this office has received no response. ________________________________________________________________ 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 available evidence of record and the applicant's complete submission 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 relief beyond that already administratively granted is not warranted. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to grant the relief sought in this application. ________________________________________________________________ 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-2012-03030 in Executive Session on 5 March 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 5 Jul 12, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 17 Aug 12. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Aug 12.