RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00955
INDEX CODE: 107.00, 128.14
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be corrected to reflect award of a ten percent increase in
retired pay based on extraordinary heroism in connection with his
Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) recognition.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His records were not reviewed nor submitted for review by the 1606 MSS
Consolidated Base Personnel Office (DPMQS) at Kirtland AFB, New
Mexico.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provided copies of the
certificate, citation, and orders for award of the DFC, and other
documents associated with the matter under review.
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant initially enlisted in the Regular Air Force on
18 Oct 67. He entered his last enlistment on 4 Apr 88, on which date,
he reenlisted for a period of two years. During his service on active
duty, the applicant was progressively promoted to the grade master
sergeant.
By Special Order G-1709, dated 7 Aug 72, the applicant was awarded the
DFC for heroism while participating in aerial flight as a UH-1N
Helicopter Aerial Gunner near Dak To, Republic of Vietnam, on 10 Mar
72.
On 30 Nov 90, the applicant was relieved from active duty and retired,
effective 1 Dec 90, in the grade of master sergeant. He was credited
with 26 years and 18 Days of active duty service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Retirements Branch, AFPC/DPPRR, reviewed this application and
recommended denial. DPPRR noted that the applicant was awarded the
DFC for heroism while engaged in combat action. DPPRR indicated that,
while the applicant’s actions were clearly heroic, he was not eligible
for Secretarial review for award of the 10 percent pay increase
because the DFC was awarded for heroism in a combat situation.
Secretarial review only applies if a DFC is awarded for action while
not in combat. Although it appears that another member was, in fact,
awarded the 10 percent increase for a similar action, this fact does
not alter the requirements for consideration. Basing the granting of
the increased retired pay on these grounds would be patently unfair to
all previous members not receiving the increased retired pay because
their DFC was awarded for heroism occurring in combat actions.
Although the applicant provided documentation awarding another
individual the 10 percent increase in retired pay under similar
circumstances, DPPRR indicated that they can only presume this
determination was by mistake since the award is not eligible for
determination. Upon reviewing the additional names listed on Special
Order G-1709, dated 7 Aug 72, they have discovered that, besides the
applicant and the other person mentioned in his application, five
additional individuals have retired from the Air Force. Neither the
applicant nor the five other individuals received the 10 percent
increase in retired pay.
A complete copy of the DPPRR evaluation, with attachments, is at
Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 15
Jun 98 for review and response. As of this date, no response has been
received by this office (Exhibit D).
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law
or regulations.
2. The application was not timely filed; 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 probable 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 Staff
and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.
Therefore, absent clear and convincing evidence that the applicant met
the established criteria for award of a ten percent increase in his
retired based on his receipt of the DFC, we find no compelling basis
to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of probable 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 this application in
Executive Session on 3 Nov 98, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Rita S. Looney, Panel Chair
Mr. Steven A. Shaw, Member
Mr. Patrick R. Wheeler, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 Mar 98, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRR, dated 6 May 98.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 15 Jun 98.
RITA S. LOONEY
Panel Chair
DPPRR indicated that, while the applicant’s actions were clearly heroic, he was not eligible for Secretarial review for award of the 10 percent pay increase because the DFC was awarded for heroism in a combat situation. A complete copy of the DPPRR evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 15 Jun 98 for review and...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00010
Although we find the applicant's actions which led to award of the Airman's Medal and two DFCs for his acts of heroism to be truly commendable, we find no evidence of either an error or an injustice in this case. In this regard, we note that the SAFPC considered the aforementioned decorations for award of an additional 10 percent in retired pay and found that, while heroic, his actions did not measure up to the standard required for an "extraordinary" determination. Novel, Member The...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1995-02742A
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 95-02742 COUNSEL: VFW HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Counsel requests consideration for a ten percent increase in the applicant’s retired pay, retroactive to his retirement date, due to the award of the Silver Star through AFBCMR action in July 1996. ...
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 95-02742 COUNSEL: VFW HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Counsel requests consideration for a ten percent increase in the applicant’s retired pay, retroactive to his retirement date, due to the award of the Silver Star through AFBCMR action in July 1996. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01203
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C and D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. The Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council approved the award of the AmnM to the applicant for his action, at which time they also considered and disapproved award of the ten...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01762
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibits C & G. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial. The DFC may be awarded to any person who, after 6 Apr 17, while serving in any capacity with the US Armed Forces, distinguished themselves by heroism or...
In the alternative, his records be corrected to show he was retired because of physical disability with a compensable rating of 30% effective 8 Jul 97. In support of his application, the applicant provided a brief by counsel expanding on the foregoing contentions; his performance records; records associated with his participation in the Weight Management Program (WMP) and the demotion action; and extracts from his medical records. The board recommended that the applicant’s case be referred...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01651
________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR recommends the applicant’s request for issuance of the PH, DFC and BSM to her late husband be denied, and states, in part, that no official documentation has been provided to show the member was recommended for, or awarded the DFC, BSM, and PH. RITA S. LOONEY Panel Chair MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR) SUBJECT: XXXXXXXXX,...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02871
In November 2004, the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) considered and denied the applicant’s request for a 10% increase in retirement pay based on receiving the SS and DFC for heroism. Review by the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC), the approval authority, determined that the increase in pay was not warranted in this case. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-00903
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-00903 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect award of the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) with First Oak Leaf Cluster (1 OLC). The DFC was established by Congress on 2 Jul 26 and is awarded for heroism or extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial...