RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-O4252 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be reconstructed. 2. He receive a one-time replacement of the medals he earned while on active duty, to include the Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon (SAEMR), and the Good Conduct Medal (GCM). ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 1. His DD Form 214 and his official military personnel records (MPR) were destroyed in the 1973 fire at the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC). 2. He did qualify second best with the carbine rifle; therefore, he should have received the SAEMR. And, he had no derogatory reports; therefore, he should have received the GCM. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant served on active duty in the Regular Air Force from 18 Dec 51 through 17 Dec 55. On 18 Oct 02, NPRC notified the applicant his military personnel records were lost or destroyed in the fire of 1973. On 28 Aug 13, AFPC/DPSID sent the applicant a one-time replacement of the National Defense Service Medal (NDSM). On 5 Mar 14, AFPC/DPSOR provided the applicant a reconstructed DD Form 214. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C and D. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends disapproval of the award of the SAEMR, indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. There is insufficient documentation to support the applicant qualified for the award, such as a Special Order or Air Force Form 522, USAF Ground Weapons Training Data, verifying the applicant qualified as expert with either the M-16 rifle or issue handgun. The applicant’s statement that he qualified second best does not meet criteria for the award. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOR will provide the applicant a reconstructed (replacement) DD Form 214 via administrative relief, pending the panel’s decision concerning his request for award of the SAEMR. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation with attachment is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 31 Mar 14 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E). ________________________________________________________________ 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 an 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/DPSID and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. We note that AFPC/DPSOR has resolved the applicant’s request for a reconstructed DD Form 214 administratively. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting any relief beyond that rendered administratively. ________________________________________________________________ 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-2013-04252 in Executive Session on 19 Jun 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 6 Sep 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 21 Jan 14. Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 5 Mar 14, w/atchs. Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR dated 31 Mar 14.