RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03827 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

1. His Meritorious Service Medal Second Oak Leaf Cluster (MSM 
2OLC) be considered for upgrade to the Bronze Star Medal (BSM) 
and the inclusive period for the decoration be amended to read 
10 Mar 08 to 3 Sep 08, instead of 10 Mar 07 to 3 Sep 08. 

 

2. If his request for award of the BSM is approved, the BSM be 
entered in his records, and that he be given Special Selection 
Board (SSB) consideration for promotion to the grade of 
lieutenant colonel by the P0508B and P0509B Lieutenant Colonel 
Central Selection boards with the corrected record. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

The original DA Form 638, Recommendation for Award, dated 11 Oct 
08, with an inclusive period of 10 Mar 08 to 3 Sep 08 was for 
award of the BSM and should not have been downgraded to the MSM. 

 

He was recommended for a BSM for his service in Kabul, 
Afghanistan from 10 Mar 08 to 3 Sep 08. During this period he 
led over 70 convoys through areas in the province of Kabul that 
frequently experienced direct fire, rocket, Improvised Electronic 
Devices (IED) and suicide bomber attacks targeting convoys (his 
convoys were not attacked). He led 35 key leader engagements 
with Afghan police and tribal elders “outside the wire” to 
enhance the security of Kabul. 

 

He was recommended for a BSM while serving in a combat zone and 
performing duties outside the wire in areas routinely attacked by 
insurgents and this award should not have been downgraded for 
being “non-combat.” 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his 
MSM certificate, dated 3 Sep 08 (Permanent Order #285-008), DA 
Form 638, Recommendation for Award; AF IMT 77, Letter of 
Evaluation, Memorandum from AFPC/DPSIDR, Memorandum to AFCENT A1 
Decorations, and email and phone traffic verifying his attempt to 
administratively resolve his request. 

 

The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 


STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant is presently serving on active duty in the grade of 
major. 

 

The applicant was recommended for award of the BSM for his 
service in support of Operation ENDURING FREEDOM while serving in 
Afghanistan. Based on the DA Form 638 provided, the applicant’s 
recommendation was downgraded by the approval authority from a 
BSM to the MSM for being “non-combat.” 

 

In a memorandum dated 15 Nov 10, DPSIDR advised the applicant 
that he must seek administrative relief through the original 
approval authority, the United States Air Force Central Command 
(USAFCENT). 

 

The applicant provided documentation, i.e., email and phone 
traffic, verifying his attempt to administratively resolve his 
request; however, his requests went unresolved after the agencies 
he contacted did not respond. 

 

The BSM is awarded to a person in any branch of the military who, 
while serving in any capacity with the Armed Forces of the United 
States on or after 7 Dec 41, shall have distinguished himself by 
heroic or meritorious achievement or service, not involving 
participation in aerial flight, in connection with military 
operations against an armed enemy. The award recognizes acts of 
heroism performed in ground combat if they are of lesser degree 
than that required for the Silver Star. It also recognizes single 
acts of merit and meritorious service if the achievement or 
service is of a lesser degree than that deemed worthy of the 
Legion of Merit, but such service must have been accomplished 
with distinction. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial. DPSIDR was unable to substantiate 
that an injustice exists regarding an upgrade of his MSM to BSM. 

 

Regarding the applicant’s request for an adjustment to the award 
date of his MSM 2/OLC; they were able to verify the inclusive 
period for the applicant’s service was as stated on the DA Form 
638; therefore, they recommend approval for the inclusive period 
adjustment and would require a new proposed citation to upgrade 
the award of the MSM to forward to the Secretary of the Air Force 
for signature. 

 

The complete DPSIDR evaluation is at Exhibit B. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 


The original recommendation of a BSM was justified since it was 
for meritorious service in connection with military operations 
against an armed enemy as well as being accomplished with 
distinction as stated in the BSM definition. The original BSM 
recommendation was also consistent with other BSMs awarded in the 
U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) area of responsibility (AOR) to 
USAF personnel. 

 

As noted in his Officer Performance Report (OPR), dated 31 Jan 
09, he accomplished meritorious service with distinction as noted 
in the bullets covering his service during his deployment. 

 

While the convoys he commanded were not attacked, the base he was 
stationed at, Camp Phoenix in Kabul, Afghanistan, experienced 
insurgent rocket attacks. This and other duties he performed 
constituted military operations against an armed enemy. 
Therefore, it was inaccurate to downgrade his BSM award to a MSM 
for being “non-combat.” 

 

The awarding of the BSM for this period is consistent with his 
rank, service, and achievements as well as similar to several 
BSMs awarded to other USAF majors in the AOR including relatively 
safe locations outside of Iraq and Afghanistan. Therefore, the 
downgrading of this award from a BSM to an MSM for being “non-
combat despite it being recommended and meeting the requirements 
for a BSM is inconsistent with other BSMs awarded and constitutes 
an injustice which should be corrected. 

 

The applicant’s complete response, with attachment, is at Exhibit 
D. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 error or injustice. We took notice 
of the applicant's complete submission to include his rebuttal 
submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree 
with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of 
primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for 
our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an 
error or injustice. The applicant’s contentions are duly noted; 
however, we are not persuaded by the evidence provided that the 
action by USAFCENT to downgrade his award caused him to be the 
victim of error injustice. While the applicant appears to argue 
that the downgrade of his award is inconsistent with awards 
approved for other similarly situated officers, he has not 
provided evidence to confirm this. Regarding the applicant’s 
request for an adjustment to the inclusive period for his award 
of the MSM 2OLC, we have been informed this portion of his 


request will be administratively corrected. Therefore, in the 
absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no 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 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 Docket Number 
BC-2010-03827 in Executive Session on 23 Aug 11, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Forms 149, dated 11 Aug 10, and 3 May 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSIDR, dated 23 May 11. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Jun 11. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 2 Jul 11, w/atch. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair