RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-02285

						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be awarded the following medals:

1.  Nuclear Deterrence Operations Service Medal (NDOSM).  (Administratively resolved).  

2.  Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM).


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He served in a unit with a nuclear mission but the NDOSM was not created until 27 May 14, four years after his discharge, however, the award of the medal is retroactive to 26 Dec 91.  Also, he served with distinction while assigned to Yokota AB, Japan, but was unfairly denied an AFAM at the time of his permanent change of station (PCS).  

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 20 Sep 00.

On 27 May 10, the applicant was furnished an honorable discharge, and was credited with 9 years, 8 months, and 8 days of active service, to include 4 years, 3 months, and 23 days of foreign service .   

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 of the request for award of the Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM) indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice warranting award of the AFAM.  After a thorough review of the applicant’s official military personnel record, they were unable to verify award of the AFAM.  The AFAM was authorized by the Secretary of the Air Force on 12 Oct 80, and is awarded to members of the Armed Forces of the United States and foreign military personnel, below the rank of Colonel, after 30 Sep 81 who, while serving in any capacity with the United States Air Force, distinguish themselves by meritorious service or achievement.  In order for his request to be reasonably considered for the AFAM, he will need to submit a signed recommendation from someone within his chain of command at the timeframe in question, a proposed citation, and eyewitness statements.  

Notwithstanding the above, they were able to determine that the NDOSM should have been awarded during his service from 20 Sep 00 to 27 May 10 and was not reflected in his records.  Upon final board decision, administrative correction of the applicant’s official military personnel record will be completed by AFPC/DPSOR.

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 30 Oct 15 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.  While the applicant claims a date of discovery of less than three years ago, in our view, the reasonable date of discovery of the alleged error or injustice was more than three years ago and the application is therefore untimely.  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 warranting award of the Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM).  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 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-2015-02285 in Executive Session on 24 Feb 16 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	

Although __      chaired the panel, in view of his unavailability,           has signed as Acting Panel Chair.  The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-02285 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 28 May 15, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSID, dated 14 Sep 15
			  w/atch.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Oct 15.