RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2020-01833

XXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL: NONE
	
	HEARING REQUESTED: NO	

APPLICANT’S REQUEST

The Remote Combat Effects Campaign Medal (RCECM) be added to his official records and his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.

APPLICANT’S CONTENTIONS

He has qualifying participation in Operation ENDURING FREEDOM.  The medal was established after he separated.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant is a former Air Force staff sergeant (E-5).

According to AF Forms 910, Enlisted Performance Report (AB thru TSgt), for periods 15 Feb 11 to 14 Feb 14, the applicant was assigned to an Air Force Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR) Agency.  His Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC) is reflected as 1N151A (Geospatial Intelligence) and his duty title was as a Full Motion Video (FMV) Supervisor.  His significant additional duties were as a Geospatial Analyst, FMV Screener, and Unit Training Monitor Assistant.

On 20 Oct 14, the applicant was discharged and issued a DD Form 214.  He was credited with 8 years, 1 month, and 22 days of active duty service.    

For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisory at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION

AFPC/DP3SP recommends denying the application.  After a thorough review of the applicant’s official military personnel record and provided documentation, they were unable to verify award of the RCECM.  Enlisted performance reports dated 15 Feb 11 to 14 Feb 14, reflect the applicant’s AFSC as 1N151A.  Although it appears the applicant worked with data ISR aircraft,  it does not appear he “personally provided hands-on employment of a weapon system that had direct and immediate impact on a named combat operation,”  rendering him ineligible for award of the RCECM.  

The Secretary of the Air Force approved establishment of the RCECM on 22 May 19, to recognize U.S. Air Force military members in a non-deployed status, who directly participated in a Department of Defense (DoD) combat operation from a remote location.  The medal is awarded to Air Force service members who, on or after 11 Sep 01, distinguished themselves by direct participation in a DoD combat operation, under the following conditions:  (1) was assigned or attached to a unit directly supporting a DoD combat operation as approved by the Chief of Staff of the Air Force (operation defined in AFMAN 36-2806, Awards and Memorialization Program); (2) was serving in a remotely piloted aircraft; cyber; space; or ISR career field; (3) personally provided hands-on employment of a weapon system that had direct and immediate impact on an named combat operation (“hands-on defined as employment of a weapons system, including remote employment, or other activities that had a direct, immediate, and on-site effect on the outcome of an engagement or similar operation); and (4) was not physically exposed to hostile actions or at risk of exposure to hostile action.

The complete advisory opinion is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION

The Board sent a copy of the advisory opinion to the applicant on 10 Feb 22 for comment (Exhibit D), and the applicant replied on 27 Mar 22.  In his response, the applicant contended he was assigned to the 30th and 45th Intelligence Squadrons under the 497th ISR (DGS-1) at Joint Base Langley-Eustis, Virginia.  DGS-1 was a physical component of the Air Force Distributed Common Ground System otherwise known as AN/GSQ-272 Sentinel Weapon System, as defined by the United States Air Force.  By providing near real-time exploitation of intelligence information at DGS-1, he did in fact “personally provide hands-on employment of a weapon system that had direct and immediate impact on a named combat operation.”  The effects of his hands-on employment of the AN/GSQ272 Sentinel Weapon System is documented in his enlisted performance reports.

The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit E.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

1.  The application was timely filed.

2.  The applicant exhausted all available non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.  After reviewing all Exhibits, the Board concludes the applicant is not the victim of an error or injustice.  The applicant contends he is authorized the RCECM because was assigned to an ISR Agency and his AF Forms 910 during the period in question are evidence.  However, following a review of the applicant’s AF Forms 910, the Board determined there is no evidence the applicant “personally provided “hands-on employment of a weapon system that had direct and immediate impact on a named combat operation.” Therefore, the Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of AFPC/DP3SP and finds a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  Accordingly, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

RECOMMENDATION

The Board recommends informing the applicant the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice, and the Board will reconsider the application only upon receipt of relevant evidence not already presented.

CERTIFICATION

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2020-01833 in Executive Session on 18 Aug 22:

Panel Chair
Panel Member
Panel Member

All members voted against correcting the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 1 May 20.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory Opinion, AFPC/DP3SP, dated 31 Oct 21.
Exhibit D:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to Applicant, dated 10 Feb 22.
Exhibit E:	Applicant’s Response, dated 27 Mar 22.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings, as required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.