RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02871
INDEX CODE: 107.00
XXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
XXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 19 Mar 06
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be awarded a ten percent increase in his retired pay as a result of
receiving the Silver Star (SS) and the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) for
heroism.
_______________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was not told of the benefit for a ten percent increase in retired pay
due to him receiving two medals for heroism and his records were not
screened at retirement to apply for this benefit. All of his medals were
not even put on his DD Form 214, Report of Separation From Active Duty.
In support of his application, the applicant provides copies of his DD Form
214 and award elements. The applicant’s complete submission, with
attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant was honorably released from active duty on 28 February 1978
and retired for years of service, effective 1 March 1978. He served a
total of 25 years, 8 months and 19 days on active duty. The applicant’s
records reflect his awards as the Air Force Commendation Medal with three
oak leaf clusters, Bronze Star Medal, Silver Star Medal, Air Force Good
Conduct Medal with four oak leaf clusters, Air Force Longevity Service
Award with four oak leaf clusters, Combat Readiness Medal, Air Force
Outstanding Unit Award, Presidential Unit Citation, Vietnam Service Medal,
Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal, Air Medal with seven oak leaf clusters,
Distinguished Flying Cross with two oak leaf clusters, Purple Heart, and
the Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon.
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.
On 6 December 2004, the Air Force Personnel Center Separations Branch
issued a DD Form 215, Correction to DD Form 214, adding the Meritorious
Service Medal and the National Defense Service Medal to the applicant’s
records.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPPR recommends denial. DPPPR states that the applicant’s request
was reviewed and denied by SAFPC on 3 November 2004. The DPPPR 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 18
February 2005, for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date,
this office has received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
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 error or injustice. After a thorough review of the evidence
of record and the applicant’s submission, we do not find his uncorroborated
assertions, in and by themselves, sufficiently persuasive so as to conclude
the actions, which led to his awards constituted extraordinary heroism to
the degree to warrant a 10% increase in his retired pay. The applicant’s
heroism is noted and our decision in no way lessens the value of his
contributions while in the service. To receive the 10% increase in pay,
Title 10, USC, Section 8991, requires the heroism to be deemed
“extraordinary.” The law gives the service secretaries the responsibility
for determining what constitutes “extraordinary” 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 applicant has not provided evidence previously unavailable
during the processing of his request that would lead us to believe
overturning the SAFPC finding is warranted. In view of the above, we find
the applicant has failed to sustain his burden that he has suffered either
an error or an injustice. Therefore, we cannot recommend granting the
relief sought.
_________________________________________________________________
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 this application in Executive
Session on 27 April 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
MS. B. J. White-Olson, Panel Chair
Mr. Jay H. Jordan, Member
Mr. Albert C. Ellett, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR
Docket Number BC-2004-02871:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 8 Sep 04, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/ DPPR, dated 11 Feb 05.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 18 Feb 05.
B. J. WHITE-OLSON
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02073
The SAFPC evaluation is at Exhibit F. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Counsel states, among other things, that but for the applicant’s actions on 5 June 1944, the mission’s command pilot would have been in severe shock and unconscious in a matter of minutes and incapable of the aircraft flight maneuvers for which he was later awarded the Medal of Honor. Based on the established 8th Air Force policy of...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02176
The AFBCMR considered and denied the applicant’s previous request to have his DFC, 3OLC upgraded to the SS Medal for his action on 24 May 1969. He was told at the time, the 8th TFW would only submit a recommendation for one SS Medal and since the other pilot was the first to destroy 24 trucks, he would receive the higher award. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00478
On 4 November 2002, the applicant was awarded the Air Medal 4th OLC for heroism while participating in aerial flight on 23 June 1944. AFPC/DPPPR states that the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) reviewed the award recommendation package and disapproved the DFC, but approved award of the Air Medal with four oak leaf clusters for heroism. The applicant has provided no evidence that was unavailable to SAFPC at the time they considered his case and we are unpersuaded by the...
The pilot of the 1 December 1971 mission recommends the applicant be awarded the DFC, 1 OLC, and states that due to the applicant’s quick and accurate interpretation of the Cambodian Ground Commander’s requests during the mission, they were able to place seven separate sets of fighters in and around Kampong Thma as close as 100 meters of the friendly forces, preventing the overrun of the city and saving the lives of many friendly Cambodian troops. Applicant’s complete submission, with...
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 | CY2005 | BC-2005-02299
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02299 INDEX NUMBER: 107.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: ROBERT L. ASTON XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 2 Jan 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded an additional oak leaf cluster to the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) and two additional oak leaf clusters to the Air Medal (AM). ...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02255
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02255 INDEX NUMBER: 107.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: ROBERT L. ASTON XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 22 Jan 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded two Distinguished Flying Crosses (DFCs), an additional oak leaf cluster to the Air Medal (AM), and the Army Commendation Medal (ACM). In this...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | bc-2004-02294
During the period in question, he was told by a major at base headquarters that upon returning stateside, he would receive the DFC for his completion of a tour of 32 combat missions and an oak leaf cluster to the DFC for his completion of 14 lead missions. Under the revised policy, the DFC could be awarded for acts of heroism in combat flight or extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight. In view of this statement, and given the total number of missions the applicant...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03307
The Air Medal (AM) that was awarded to him on 4 November 2002 by the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) is not the appropriate decoration for his actions. The control cables were severed, and the aircraft could not be landed safely without the cables controlling the flaps. DPPPR states the DFC is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by heroism or extraordinary achievement while participating in flight.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02052
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02052 INDEX NUMBER: 107.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: ROBERT L. ASTON HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded two additional oak leaf cluster to the Distinguished Flying Cross and an additional oak leaf cluster to the Air Medal. In 1946, General “Hap” Arnold ordered theater commanders not to award the AM...