RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02648 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM), third Oak Leaf Custer. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: While assigned to the 437th Aircraft Maintenance Squadron he performed duties as a Flight-Line Expediter. He received an assignment and was told by his Officer in Charge (OIC) that before he moved to his new unit, he would receive an AFCM. The medal was never awarded. He identified the oversight and sought proper administrative actions via the base personnel office, in which he was told they could not do anything at their level. In support of his request, the applicant provided a copy of the DÉCOR-6 rip, recommending him for the AFCM and a letter from his supervisor at the time, dated 24 Jun 14. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is serving in the Regular Air Force in the grade of Technical Sergeant. The applicant’s official military personnel records reflect the award of the following Air Force Medals and/or Ribbons: - Air Force Commendation with two Oak Leaf Clusters - Air Force Achievement Medal - Global War on Terrorism Service Medal - Air Force Expeditionary Service 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. After a thorough review of the applicant's official military record, they were unable to verify award of the AFCM, third Oak Leaf Cluster. They did recognize a DÉCOR-6 rip signed and endorsed by the applicant’s commander. The OIC signature at some point was crossed out and replaced with a new signature. They noted that “Recommend for the Decoration” was circled, then appeared to have also been crossed out and “Do Not Recommend” was circled. There is a note at the bottom portion of the DÉCOR-6 which stated “Not enough time”. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In response to the Air Force advisory, the applicant has submitted a proposed citation with the inclusive dates of 1 May 10 to 30 Oct 11, and a copy of his 1 Nov 10 thru 31 Oct 11 Enlisted Performance Report. 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, to include his rebuttal comments, 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-2014-02648 in Executive Session on 5 May 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-02648 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 Jun 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSID, dated 25 Sep 14. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Nov 14. Exhibit E. Applicant’s Response, dated 25 Sep 14.