RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03547 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. His records be corrected to reflect he was awarded the Meritorious Service Medal (MSM), Fourth Oak Leaf Cluster (OLC). 2. His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (issued in 2012), be corrected to properly reflect all data related to his military service, as described in the original DD Form 214 he lost (issued in 1997). APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 1. He is missing a fifth MSM (also stated, MSM with four OLCs) from his official record. 2. At some point after his retirement in 1997, he lost his DD Form 214 and requested a duplicate copy. In July, 2012, his DD Form 214 was recreated and reissued with numerous errors and/or void of any information in multiple areas. The applicant has since found his original DD Form 214; however, this version had become void due to the new form being reissued in 2012. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 25 Jul 12, AFPC/DPSOR issued the applicant a reconstructed DD Form 214 which reflects that he served honorably in the Regular Air Force from 21 Jan 75 to 31 Jan 97, retired, effective 1 Feb 97, and was credited with 22 years and 10 days of active service. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are included at Exhibits C and D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of the applicant’s request to be credited with the MSM (4OLC), indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. A thorough review of the applicant's official military personnel record revealed that the applicant’s records only contain four MSMs, the basic award and three bronze oak leaf clusters. There is no official documentation, such as the special order or recommendation, in the applicant's record, nor was any provided by the applicant, to verify he was recommended for or awarded a fifth MSM. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOR recommends granting relief to correct the administrative errors on the reissued DD Form 214, indicating there is evidence of an error or injustice. AFPC/DPSOR is prepared to reissue the DD Form 214 to reflect the same data as originally reflected on the document in 1997, to the maximum extent the current Aug 2009 format and governing directives will allow. With regards to the request for a fourth OLC on the MSM, AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. Per AFPC/DPSID’s recommendation, decorations will be corrected as listed on the previous document (1997 DD Form 214), with the fourth bronze OLC omitted. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 2 Jul 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). 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 timely filed. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice warranting correction of the applicant’s records to reflect his entitlement to the MSM (4 OLC). 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 with respect to his request for the MSM (4OLC). As for his remaining request, we note that AFPC/DPSOR has determined the applicant’s DD Form 214 should be corrected to reflect his 1997 service data and will correct his records administratively. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting relief beyond that rendered administratively. 4. The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that 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-2013-03547 in Executive Session on 2 Dec 14 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 Jul 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSID, dated 17 Oct 13. Exhibit D. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 13 Mar 14. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 Jul 14. 1 2