AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 
DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-00001 
 
COUNSEL:  NONE 
HEARING DESIRED: NO 

IN THE MATTER OF: 
   
    
 
   
 
 
 
_______________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
He be awarded the Airman’s Medal (AmnM) instead of the Air Force 
Commendation  Medal  for  saving  the  life  of  an  active  duty 
dependent. 
 
_______________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
His actions to save the life of a young boy should warrant the 
award of the Airman’s Medal.  While on a fishing trip at Beale 
AFB, CA, he saved the life of a young boy who was the dependent 
of  a  servicemember  and  attempted  to  save  the  life  of  the 
servicemember but was unsuccessful.   
 
In  support  of  his  request,  the  applicant  provides  a  four-page 
supporting  statement  from  the  deceased  service  member’s  wife, 
and  copies  of  his  DD  214,  Certificate  of  Release  or  Discharge 
from  Active  Duty;  his  award  citation  for  the  Air  Force 
Commendation  Medal;  newspaper  clippings  regarding  the  incident 
and  a  similar  incident;  email  traffic  regarding  his  attempt  to 
upgrade the medal; and a letter from his Congressman in support 
of his request.   
 
The  applicant’s  complete  submission,  with  attachments,  is  at 
Exhibit A.  
 
_______________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
According  to  the  applicant’s  military  personnel  records,  he 
served in the Air Force Reserve during the matter under review. 
 
On  20  Sep  72,  the  applicant  was  awarded  the  Air  Force 
Commendation  Medal  (AFCM)  for  outstanding  achievement  for  his 
efforts  to  rescue  a  fellow  Air  Force  member  and  his  young  son 
from drowning on 29 Apr 72. 
 

 
 

 
  

 
On 1 Oct 72, the applicant was honorably discharged from the Air 
Force Reserve in the grade of captain (O-4). 
 
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of 
the Air Force, which are at Exhibits C and E. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
AFPC/DPSIDR  recommends  the  Board  consider  the  merits  of  the 
applicant’s  request  for  award  of  the  Airman’s  Medal.    The  AmnM 
is  awarded  to  any  member  of  the  armed  forces  of  the  United 
States  or  of  a  friendly  nation  who,  while  serving  in  any 
capacity, has distinguished themselves by a heroic act, usually 
at  the  voluntary  risk  of  life  but  not  involving  combat.    The 
saving of a life or the success of the voluntary heroic act is 
not essential.  In accordance with AFI 36-3803, Air Force Awards 
and  Decorations  Program,  the  Secretary  of  the  Air  Force 
Personnel Council (SAFPC) is the approval authority for the AmnM 
and  determines,  upon  approval,  entitlement  to  ten  percent 
increase  in  retirement  pay  when  awarded  for  “extraordinary 
heroism.”  Under the FY 1996 National Defense Authorization Act 
(NDAA), Section 526, a new recommendation is needed for upgrade 
of  the  applicant’s  medal.    However,  the  applicant  has  not 
submitted  a  new  recommendation,  has  not  exhausted  all 
administrative  avenues,  and  the  recommendation  package  is 
incomplete.  
 
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIDR 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 9 Apr 12 for review and comment within 30 days.  As 
of  this  date,  no  response  has  been  received  by  this  office 
(Exhibit D). 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
SAF/MRBP  recommends  denial,  indicating  they  are  unable  to 
ascertain  the  applicant’s  level  of  risk  and  courage/heroism 
based  on  the  documentation  provided  and  available  at  the  time 
the  applicant  was  awarded  the  AFCM.    While  the  applicant 
provides  a  supporting  statement  from  the  decedent’s  widow,  she 
was not an eye witness and the statement she provided does not 
verify that the applicant’s actions were at “voluntary risk” of 
his  life.    Based  on  lack  of  additional  documentation  that  was 

 

2 

 
  

 
available  at  the  time  of  the  recommendation  for  the  AFCM,  a 
determination  of  whether  the  applicant’s  efforts  met  the 
criteria for award of the Airman’s Medal cannot be made.   
A complete copy of the SAF/MRBP evaluation is at Exhibit E. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
The applicant submitted a copy of a supporting statement from an 
eye  witness  of  the  events  in  question.    The  witness  indicated 
that he was a close friend of the applicant and that he was an 
active participant in the events on that day.  He indicated that 
the  applicant  did  indeed  perform  the  heroic  acts  mentioned  in 
his application and as a result, saved the life of a young boy.   
 
The  applicant’s  complete  response,  with  attachment,  is  at 
Exhibit G. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
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.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate 
the  existence  of  an  error  or  injustice.    The  applicant  contends 
that his actions to save the life of a young boy and attempt to 
save the life of a fellow service member should warrant the award 
of the Airman’s Medal.  After a thorough review of the evidence of 
record  and  the  applicant’s  complete  submission,  we  believe  a 
preponderance of the evidence supports corrective action.  While 
we  note  the  comments  of  SAF/MRBP  indicating  that  there  is 
insufficient  evidence  to  conclude  the  applicant’s  life-saving 
efforts  met  the  criteria  for  the  AmnM,  we  find  the  supporting 
statement  provided  by  the  applicant  as  part  of  his  rebuttal 
sufficient to conclude that his efforts constituted a heroic act 
worthy of the requested decoration.  Therefore, we recommend his 
records be corrected as indicated below. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: 
 
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force 
relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that he was awarded 
the Airman’s Medal for his heroic efforts to save the lives of a 
fellow service member and his young son on 20 Sep 72.  
 

 

3 

 
  

  Chair 
  Member 
  Member 

 
________________________________________________________________ 
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number 
BC-2012-00001  in  Executive  Session  on  17  Jan  13,  under  the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 
 
 
 
 
The following documentary evidence was considered: 
 
    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated, 9 Dec 11, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit C.  Letter,AFPC/DPSIDR, dated, 9 Apr 12. 
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated, 17 Apr 12. 
Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBP, dated, 27 Nov 12. 
 
 
Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated, 4 Dec 12. 
 
Exhibit G.  Letter, Applicant, dated, 20 Dec 12. 
 
 
 
 
                                     
                                   Panel Chair 
 

 

4