RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 				DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-00156

XXXXXXXXXXX					COUNSEL:  NONE

							HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be awarded the Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM).

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His former group commander recommended the AFAM be awarded to all maintenance group members in recognition of winning the 2011 Daedalian Award.  However, due to an administrative oversight he and nine other airmen from his unit did not receive the AFAM prior to the group commander’s change of command.

The new maintenance group commander insisted that he would not consider the AFAM for those members who did not receive the AFAM prior to the former group commander’s departure.  The current group commander’s unwillingness to allow members who otherwise qualify for the AFAM to be recognized is both an error and an injustice.

In support of his request, the applicant provides a personal statement, copies of electronic communiqués and various other documents related to his appeal.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air Force in the grade of senior master sergeant (E-8).

According to the applicant’s Enlisted Performance Report for the period 20 June 2010 through 19 June 2011, he was assigned to the 723rd Aircraft Maintenance Squadron, 23rd Maintenance Group.

According the Order of Daedalians Official Website, a Daedalian trophy is awarded annually to an Air Force unit determined to have the best weapon system maintenance record for the preceding calendar year.  The 23rd Maintenance Group was the recipient for calendar year 2011. 

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.  The AFAM is awarded to members of the Armed Forces of the United States and foreign military personnel, below the rank of colonel, after 30 September 1981, who while serving in any capacity with the United States Air Force, distinguish themselves by meritorious service or achievement.

AFPC/DPSID was unable to locate any official documentation, nor was any provided by the applicant, to verify he was recommended for or awarded the AFAM.  The applicant provided email correspondence which refers to a Décor 6 and narrative citation; however, he did not provide any documentation to verify a Décor 6 or narrative citation was generated.  Should the applicant provide copies of the Décor 6 or narrative citation, he may submit that documentation to the Board for consideration.  To grant relief would be contrary to the criteria established by DoD Manual 1348.33, Manual of Military Decorations and Awards, Secretary of the Air Force, Chief of Staff, and/or the War Department.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In a letter dated 15 July 2015, the applicant requested additional time to gather further information (Exhibit E).  On 1 August 2015, the applicant’s case was administratively closed (Exhibit F).

In a letter dated 17 December 2015, the applicant requested his case be reopened.  In further support of his request, the applicant submitted a letter from his former commander [retired] dated 18 August 2015, stating in part that his former unit earned the Air Force 2011 Daedalian Trophy for the period 1 October 2010 – 30 September 2011.  The award validated the superior work of over 2,400 women and men.  As a result, he decided to reward the maintainers serving in his unit at any time during the award period with the AFAM (excluding those with an UIF).  Due to an oversight, the AFAM was not processed for the applicant.
The applicant’s complete response, with attachment, is at Exhibit G.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has 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 OPR and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice.  The letter from the applicant’s former commander dated 18 August 2015 is duly noted; however, without copies of the Décor 6 or the narrative citation, we find insufficient evidence to warrant relief.  Should the applicant provide a copy of the Décor 6 or narrative citation that establishes he was submitted for the AFAM, we would be willing to reconsider his request.  In view of the above and 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-2015-00156 in Executive Session on 22 March 2016, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 9 January 2015, w/atchs.
Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSID, dated 18 April 2015.
Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 June 2015.
Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 15 July 2015.
Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 1 August 2015.
Exhibit G.  Letter, Applicant, dated 17 December 2015, 
  w/atch.