Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04651
Original file (BC-2011-04651.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04651 

COUNSEL: NO 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

He be awarded the Legion of Merit (LOM). 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He was recommended for the LOM by his commander in 1969, which 
had been boarded and approved; however, the nomination was lost 
before being sent to Pacific Air Force (PACAF) for final 
approval. His commander reconstructed the nomination package and 
sent it forward, but it was lost again. He made inquiries about 
his award in 1979 and 1981 but his inquiries went unanswered. 

 

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of 
inquiry documentation concerning his award of the LOM, the 
reconstructed LOM nomination package, and an excerpt of the Air 
Commando Journal. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who 
served on active duty from 27 June 1963 to 1 August 1975. He 
served as an Information Officer and was progressively promoted 
to the grade of major (O-4). He was honorably discharged 
effective 1 August 1975 after serving 12 years, 1 month, and 
3 days on active duty of which 4 years, 1 month, and 3 days was 
Foreign Service. 

 

According to documents provided by the applicant, he was 
recommended for the LOM while serving in the grade of captain (O-
3), as Director of Information, 56th Air Commando Wing, Nakhom 
Airport, Thailand, from 19 July 1967 to 18 March 1968. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

SAF/MRBP recommends denial. MRBP states PACAF Special Order G-
250, dated 9 November 1970, awarded the applicant the Bronze Star 


Medal (BSM) for the period 19 July 1967 to 18 March 1968. The 
certified true copy of the BSM citation located in the 
applicant’s official personnel record is identical to the LOM 
citation except for the required opening and closing statements. 
The applicant’s DD Form 214, Report of Separation from Active 
Duty, date stamped 14 August 1975, lists the BSM in Section 26, Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and 
Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized. 

 

MRBP indicates that based on the information provided by the 
applicant and documentation contained in his official personnel 
record, given the presumption of regularity in the conduct of 
governmental affairs and without evidence to the contrary, they 
must assume the processing of the recommendation to award the 
applicant the LOM was appropriately processed in accordance with 
the governing regulatory guidance in effect at that time. The 
applicant was appropriately recognized for his service during the 
period in question with the BSM. 

 

The complete MRBR evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant 
on 7 June 2012 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). 
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. 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 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. Although the 
applicant has provided documentation supporting he was 
recommended for the LOM, we note his award of the BSM covers the 
same timeframe as in his LOM recommendation. In addition, other 
than the opening and closing statements, the BSM citation is 
identical to the proposed LOM citation. Since a member cannot be 
awarded two awards for the same events/timeframe, we believe it 
was the approval authority’s determination that award of a BSM 
was more appropriate than an LOM. In view of the above and in 


the absence of 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 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-2011-04651 in Executive Session on 17 July 2012, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection 
with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-04651: 

 

Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 Nov 11, w/atchs. 

Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBP, dated 21 May 12, w/atch. 

Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 7 Jun 12. 

 

 

 

 

Panel Chair 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03607

    Original file (BC-2011-03607.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant subsequently sought out his commander at the time to request he be recommended for award of the LOM for his distinguished actions in the mission to rescue the American captive. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIDR evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In response to the advisory opinion, the applicant provides signed, dated, and notarized recommendation for award of the LOM, as...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00615

    Original file (BC-2013-00615.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00615 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Legion of Merit (LOM). Had this award nomination been processed in a timely manner and sent to the Air Force Decorations Board - it would have been approved. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 9 October 2013.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 04528

    Original file (BC 2014 04528.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    According to the PACAF/DP, the awards board had been directed to consider the two enlisted crew members for SSs. However, the Air Force Decorations Board considered and denied the request. h. On 23 May 84, the new PACAF/CV reviewed the nomination packages and recommended both the enlisted crew members for SS.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05264

    Original file (BC 2013 05264.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    A Special Order was not provided with this request and could not be located within the applicant's official military personnel record. The special order that accompanied the LOM at the time of presentation is required to update the applicant’s records. Therefore we recommend his records be corrected to reflect the award of the LOM.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05824

    Original file (BC 2013 05824.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The May 09 award policy and award criteria message that was released Air Force wide provides the applicable regulation concerning award of the LOM. DPSID believes the applicant should be given consideration for a retirement decoration; however, in order for his request to be reasonably considered he will need to resubmit his request with an ETP memorandum signed by someone from his chain of command with first-hand knowledge of the act/achievement due to the applicant not meeting the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00147

    Original file (BC-2009-00147.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 1 May 08, XXXX/A1DPM advised the applicant’s unit the recommendation must be submitted through the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) due to the fact the applicant was already retired. RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD : Mr. XXXXXXXXXX voted to correct the records but does not desire to submit a Minority Report.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01971

    Original file (BC-2011-01971.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force which is at Exhibit B and D. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIDR acknowledges that the applicant has provided all required documentation in accordance with directives for consideration for award of the LOM. DPSIDR does not provide a recommendation and forwards the LOM to the Board for...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC 2009 01150

    Original file (BC 2009 01150.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The complete A1K evaluation is at Exhibit C. SAFPC indicates that based on the documentation provided by the applicant in the AFBCMR file, specifically due to incomplete and missing information, and incorrect format, the Air Force Decoration Board (AFDB) would have most likely disapproved the LOM. By the time the applicant’s award package was corrected, he had already retired and SAFPC would not consider it. Accordingly, we recommend that his records be corrected as indicated below.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01150

    Original file (BC-2009-01150.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The complete A1K evaluation is at Exhibit C. SAFPC indicates that based on the documentation provided by the applicant in the AFBCMR file, specifically due to incomplete and missing information, and incorrect format, the Air Force Decoration Board (AFDB) would have most likely disapproved the LOM. By the time the applicant’s award package was corrected, he had already retired and SAFPC would not consider it. Accordingly, we recommend that his records be corrected as indicated below.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00320

    Original file (BC-2011-00320.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    “The number of decorations that may be awarded to a service member is not limited; however, only one decoration is awarded for the same act, achievement, or period of service.” _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Director, SAFPC recommends denial. The Director, states based on the documentation provided by the applicant in the AFBCMR case file, had the LOM recommendation been completed prior to his retirement, the Air Force Decorations...