RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01286 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Air Force Combat Action Medal (AFCAM). ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He flew missions in support of Operation ENDURING FREEDOM (OEF) and Operation IRAQI FREEDOM (OIF) during the time period for which the AFCAM was approved. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant served in the Regular Air Force as an Aerial Gunner on a MH-53M helicopter in support of OEF and OIF. On 22 Feb 06, the applicant was honorably discharged, entered the U.S. Army, and was credited with eight years, eight months, and four days of total active service. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. On 15 Mar 07, the Secretary of the Air Force approved establishment of the AFCAM to recognize any military member of the Air Force (Airman Basic through Colonel) who actively participated in combat (ground or air). The principal eligibility criteria is that the individual must have been under direct and hostile fire while operation in unsecured space (outside the defended perimeter), or physically engaging hostile forces with direct and lethal fire. The AFCAM may be awarded for qualifying service from 11 Sep 01 to a date to be determined. Retroactive awards prior to 11 Sep 01 are not authorized. There is no documentation in the applicant’s file which indicates he was awarded the AFCAM. The applicant’s request was forwarded for consideration to Air Force Central Command, the original award approval authority. On 4 Oct 13, Air Force Central Command disapproved the request because the justification does not support the award. However, the applicant has one year from the date of the disapproval to submit new relevant documentation not previously submitted for a one-time reconsideration. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 13 Dec 13 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1.  The applicant has not 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 the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. While the evidence of record makes it clear that the applicant repeatedly served in unsecured space during a qualifying contingency operation, we could find no direct evidence in his submission or military personnel records that he was under direct and hostile fire while in unsecured space, or that he physically engaged hostile forces with direct and lethal fire while within a defended perimeter. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the 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-2013-01286 in Executive Session on 13 Feb 13, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 Mar 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 12 Nov 13. Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 Dec 13. 1 2