RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:				DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-04667	
	
						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to show he is entitled to 4-5 
additional Air Medals (AM).

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was on several temporary duty (TDY) assignments to Udorn Air 
Base (AB).  He flew combat support missions over Laos, Cambodia 
and Vietnam from November 1970 to May 1972.  This should entitle 
him to the Vietnam Service Medal.  He is due additional Air 
Medals for flights into typhoons and into Laos and Cambodia.

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

1.  The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air who 
enlisted on 7 August 1968.  He was progressively promoted to the 
grade of Sergeant, E-4 and was released from active duty on 
4 August 1972.  He was credited with serving 3 years, 11 months 
and 28 days of active duty service.  

2.  Item 24, Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, 
Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized of his DD 
Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer 
or Discharge, reflects award of the Air Medal with 1 Oak Leaf 
Cluster, (AM w/1OLC) and a National Defense Service Medal 
(NDSM).  

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

1.  AFPC/DPSID states after a complete review of the applicant’s 
military personnel record (MPR), they have verified the 
applicant’s entitlement to the VSM and his record will be 
updated to reflect this award; however, they recommend denial of 
his claim for award of additional Air Medals.  They could not 
locate official documentation that verified he was recommended 
for and awarded the additional Air Medals.  The Air Medal may be 
awarded to any person who, while serving in any capacity with 
the United States Armed Forces, subsequent to 8 September 1939, 
distinguishes himself or herself by meritorious achievement 
while participating in an aerial flight.  The Air Medal may be 
awarded for combat or non-combat action in recognition of single 
acts of valor, heroism or merit while participating in an aerial 
flight. Additionally, it may be conferred for sustained 
meritorious achievement (distinction) in the performance of 
duties involving aerial flight.  

2.  DPSID further states retroactive recommendations for awards 
for retirees and veterans beyond the 2-year time limitation must 
be submitted in accordance with Title 10, Section 1130, United 
States Code.  The National Defense Authorization Act of FY96 
passed Title 10, Section 1130, United States Code. The Law 
allows for the submission of award recommendations (and the 
upgrading of previously approved awards) without regard to any 
previously imposed time constraints for submission if referred 
by a Member of Congress.  

The complete AFPC/DPSID evaluation, with attachment, is at 
exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 21 January 2013 for review and comment within 30 
days.  To date, a response has not been received.  

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by 
existing law or regulations.  We note the OPR advisory comments 
concerning the requirements of Title 10, United States Code, 
Section 1130 (10 U.S.C. § 1130), enacted as part of the Fiscal 
Year 1996 National Defense Authorization Act.  However, we do 
not agree that such avenues must be first exhausted prior to 
seeking relief under the provisions of 10 U.S.C. § 1552.  The 
relief offered under 10 U.S.C. § 1130 is a statutory remedy, not 
administrative relief.  Therefore, principles of administrative 
law requiring exhaustion of administrative remedies are 
inapplicable here.  Moreover, as previously noted by this Board 
in decisions concerning this issue, 10 U.S.C. § 1130 clearly 
states that, “Upon request of a member of Congress…the Secretary 
shall make a determination as to the merits of approving the 
award…” – however, it does not require that an applicant must do 
so prior to submitting a request under the provisions of 10 
U.S.C. § 1552.  Finally, we find the OPR's interpretation of 10 
U.S.C. § 1130 contradicts the very intent of Congress in 
establishing service correction boards 65 years ago, i.e., to 
remove their required involvement and avoid the continued use of 
private relief bills, in order to affect such corrections to 
military records.  

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 
thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the 
applicant’s contentions, we are not persuaded that he has met 
his burden of establishing that his record should be corrected 
to reflect his entitlement to 4-5 additional Air Medals for 
flights into typhoons and into Laos and Cambodia.  We note that 
documents in the applicant’s Military Personnel Record indicate 
he was awarded the Air Medal with one oak leaf cluster (AM w/1 
OLC) for flying reconnaissance missions involving extremely 
hazardous penetrations into fully developed typhoons.  However, 
this documentation is not sufficient to determine his 
entitlement of the 4-5 additional Air Medals.  Therefore, in the 
absence of documentary evidence to corroborate his claim, 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 this application 
in Executive Session on 27 June 2013, under the provisions of 
AFI 36-2603:

				, Panel Chair
				, Member
				, Member







The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR 
Docket Number BC-2012-04667:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 Oct 2012, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 3 Jan 2013, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Jan 2013.




                                   
                                   Panel Chair