RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00511 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be corrected to reflect an “A” device on his Air Force Overseas Ribbon–Short (AFOR–S) as well as a separation medal recognizing his accomplishment from his last duty assignment. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was stationed at Thule Air Base, Greenland and is authorized the Artic “A” device on his AFOR-S for artic service. Prior to separating the applicant’s commander presented him a “Letter of Appreciation” for his service; however, he was informed by two Senior Noncommissioned Officers that he will receive a medal in the mail. He never received it. In support of his request, the applicant provides a letter detailing his responsibilities and assignments during his enlistment. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 10 Oct 80. On 1 Jun 92, the applicant was furnished an Honorable discharge, and was credited with 11 years, 7 months, and 22 days of active service. The applicant’s DD Form 214 reflects the following Air Force Medals and/or Ribbons: Air Force Commendation Medal with one Oak Leaf Cluster, Air Force Achievement Medal, Air Force Outstanding Unit Award, Air Force Organizational Excellence Award, Air Force Good Conduct Medal with two Oak Leaf Clusters, National Defense Service Medal, Humanitarian Service Medal, Air Force Overseas Ribbon – Short, Air Force Oversea Ribbon – Long, Air Force Longevity Service Award with one Oak Leaf Cluster, Noncommissioned Officers Professional Military Education Graduate Ribbon and Air Force Training Ribbon. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. Thule Air Base, Greenland does qualify for the Artic device; however the applicant served in the area of eligibility before the “A” device was authorized for wear on the AFOR-S rendering him ineligible for the award. They also completed a thorough review of the applicant’s official military personnel records and were unable to locate a medal for his last duty assignment. While the applicant states he was told a medal would be mailed to him, he does not state any specific award or decoration but appears to be seeking a decoration. In order for the applicant’s request to be reasonably considered he needs to provide a recommendation from someone with firsthand knowledge of the act/achievement, preferably someone from his chain of command, a proposed citation and eyewitness statements attesting to the act/achievement. 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 22 Sep 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). 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 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. 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-2014-00511 in Executive Session on 10 Feb 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 Jan 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSID, dated 11 Apr 14. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Sep 14.