Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02858
Original file (BC-2006-02858.doc) Auto-classification: Denied


                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-02858
            INDEX CODE:  107.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  24 MAR 08

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM) be upgraded  to  the  Airman’s  Medal
(AmnM) or the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He should have been awarded  the  AmnM  or  the  AFCM  for  his  heroic  act
(extinguishing a fire under a B-52 engine during bomb loading on  an  active
flight line) on 14 March 1985, rather than the AFAM.  He  acted  with  total
disregard to his own safety.  His act prevented the aircraft from  exploding
and killing him and or all the members of his load crew.

In support of his request, the applicant provided a copy of the citation  to
accompany the AFAM.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 30 Nov 1983, applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force.

On 29 February 1988, applicant  was  honorably  released  from  active  duty
under the provisions of AFR  39-10,  Early  Separation  Program  –  Strength
Reduction.  He served four years, three months, and one day of total  active
service.

Applicant was awarded the AFAM on 14 March 1985 for heroism.

_________________________________________________________________


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPR recommends denial.  DPPPR states they were  unable  to  locate  a
recommendation submitted by the applicant’s recommending official or  senior
rater for upgrade of the AFAM to AmnM  or  AFCM.   It  is  the  recommending
official’s decision as to  determine  whether  a  decoration  recommendation
will be submitted in accordance with AFI 36-2803, paragraph 1.7.1.

Current timelines for submitting decorations is two years from the  date  of
the act or achievement.   However,  under  the  Fiscal  Year  1996  National
Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), Section 526, which was  enacted  into  law
on 10 February 1996, this timeline, has now been waived.   Under  this  Act,
which lifted the  time  limitations  on  submitting  award  recommendations,
veterans who may make a case  for  award  consideration  (or  upgrade  of  a
previously awarded decoration) not  previously  eligible  because  of  these
time limits, may now submit for award consideration.  However,  the  written
recommendation must meet two criteria – be made by someone, other  than  the
member himself, in the  member’s  chain  of  command  at  the  time  of  the
incident, and, who has firsthand knowledge of the acts of achievements;  and
be submitted through a congressional member who can ask a  military  service
to review a proposal for a decoration based on the merits  of  the  proposal
and the award criteria in existence when the event occurred.

The DPPPR complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the evaluation and  states  he  risked  his  life  by
staying and fighting the fire.  He saved others by putting the fire out  and
injured himself in the process.  He went above  and  beyond  while  fighting
the fire and should have received the AmnM.

Applicant’s complete response with attachments is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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 an error or injustice warranting  award  of  the  AmnM  or  the
AFCM.  After reviewing the evidence of record we are not persuaded that  the
applicant’s AFAM should  be  upgraded.   His  contentions  are  duly  noted;
however, we agree with the Air Force office of primary  responsibility  that
there is no indication in the  applicant’s  military  personnel  records  to
substantiate that he was recommended by anyone in his chain of  command  for
a higher award, therefore, we adopt its  rationale  as  the  basis  for  our
conclusion that the applicant has  not  been  the  victim  of  an  error  or
injustice.   Should  he  provide  the  appropriate  documentation,  such  as
letters from the recommending official or senior rater recommending him  for
either the requested awards, we would be willing to reconsider  his  appeal.
Therefore,  in  the  absence  of  evidence  to  the  contrary,  we  find  no
compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate  the
existence of an error or an 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-2006-
02858 in Executive Session on 28 November 2006, under the provisions of  AFI
36-2603:

                 Ms. Cathlynn B. Novel, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Judith B. Oliva, Member
                 Mr. Don H. Kendrick, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Sep 06, w/atch.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 3 Oct 06.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Oct 06.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, undated, w/atchs.




                       CATHLYNN B. NOVEL
                       Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02460

    Original file (BC-2006-02460.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02460 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE: 19 FEBRUARY 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to show he was awarded the Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM) w/1OLC. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01576

    Original file (BC-2002-01576.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    His Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) be upgraded to a Airman’s Medal (AmnM) for action performed on 13 November 1982. b. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: On 1 October 1984, he was awarded an Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM) for Heroism for his actions on 13 November 1982. A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00866

    Original file (BC-2007-00866.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In accordance with AFI 36-2803, recommendations for the AFCM and AFAM must be submitted as soon as possible following the act, achievement, or service. There is no documentation available or provided by the applicant that indicates his commander recommended or approved awards for the AFCM or AFAM. The timeline for submitting decorations is two years from the date of the act or achievement.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | bc-2005-01522

    Original file (bc-2005-01522.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    He should be awarded the DFC for his actions on 23 June 1952. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that the AmnM is awarded for voluntary risk of life not involving actual combat and the applicant’s actions on 23 June 1952 were previously recognized in the AM he was awarded for numerous operational flights from 8 May 1953 to 23 June 1952. On 14 June 1952, he was awarded...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01363

    Original file (BC-2005-01363.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Furthermore, the applicant has not provided any evidence to reflect a second JMUA was awarded. However, there is no evidence in the applicant’s records indicating she served in another unit that was awarded the JMUA; nor has the applicant provided any documentation substantiating she was awarded a second JMUA. However, should the applicant provide documentation substantiating she was assigned to another unit receiving the JMUA, this Board would be willing to review the materials for...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03541

    Original file (BC-2006-03541.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his request, the applicant provided a copy an AFCM citation and certificate awarded to a former member of his unit which was awarded during the time he alleges he was assigned. However, after review by AFPC/DPPRY, it was discovered the applicant is also entitled to the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award with Valor and one oak leaf cluster, the Air Force Good Conduct Medal, the Air Force Longevity Service Award, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm, and the Republic...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03215

    Original file (BC-2005-03215.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    They have contacted the applicant several times and his losing organization (USAF Aerospace Medical Squadron, Brooks AFB, Texas) to provide this office copies of the approved AFCM decoration elements for file in his military personnel record. The Board notes the applicant’s DD Form 214 indicates award of the AFCM; however, there are no special orders or the award certificate in the applicant’s military record to substantiate entitlement to the decoration. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00218

    Original file (BC-2007-00218.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He received the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award with “V” device for his 2005 deployment, and the Air Force Expeditionary Service Medal (AFESM) with Gold Border, which proves he was in a hostile environment. They advise the Army CAB may be awarded to any soldier after 18 September 2001 performing duties in an area where hostile fire pay or imminent danger pay is authorized, who is personally present and actively engaged or engaged by the enemy. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02759

    Original file (BC-2006-02759.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the applicant did not serve in Vietnam, therefore is not eligible for the RVNCM. The complete AFPC/DPPPR evaluation is attached at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states the Air Force failed in its responsibility to inform separating personnel that the Board for Corrections of Military Records (BCMR) was an option. After a thorough review of the available evidence and the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2002-04071

    Original file (BC-2002-04071.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-04071 INDEX NUMBER: 107.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Air Force Achievement Medal, First Oak Leaf Cluster (AFAM, 1 OLC), awarded for the period 24 April 1999 to 23 April 2001, be upgraded to an Air Force Commendation Medal, Second Oak Leaf Cluster (AFCM, 2 OLC),...