RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03520 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: YES 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His previously awarded Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) be 
upgraded to the Airman's Medal (AmnM). 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He meets the criteria for award of the AmnM, however, due to 
mismanagement and excessive delays, the AmnM was denied and 
instead he was awarded the AFCM. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air Force in 
the grade of major (O-4). 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of 
the Air Force. Accordingly, there is no need to recite these 
facts in this Record of Proceedings. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSID recommends denial. DPSID states that in accordance 
with DoDM 1348.33, Manual of Military Decorations and Awards, 
the AmnM is awarded to members of the Armed Forces of the United 
States or foreign military personnel who, while serving in any 
capacity with the United States Air Force, distinguish 
themselves by heroism involving risk of life under conditions 
other than those for actual conflict with an enemy. In 2009 the 
original approval authority considered and denied the 
applicant's package for award of the AmnM as not meeting the 
criteria established for the award. The applicant then 
submitted for reconsideration in 2011; however, his package 
lacked proper MAJCOM endorsement and the Air Force Decorations 
Board (AFDB) returned the package without action. The 


applicant's MAJCOM has since awarded the applicant the AFCM for 
his actions and the applicant is now seeking an upgrade to the 
AmnM. Award of any decoration for the same inclusive period and 
act constitutes dual recognition and is prohibited by DoDM 
1348.33. 

 

The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

SAF/MRBP recommends denial. MRBP states that the AFDB 
considered the applicant (and another Air Force officer) for 
award of the AmnM on 7 Aug 2009 and disapproved the award, 
recommending downgrade to the AFCM for an act of courage. The 
recommendation for the AmnM was signed on 8 Jun 2009 by the 
Commander, Air Education and Training Command (AETC). 
Subsequently, the 58th Special Operations Wing (SOW) Commander 
approved the AFCM for an act of courage, Special Order GZ-285, 
dated 6 Mar 2012. 

 

On 23 Oct 2012, the AFDB received a request for award 
reconsideration which included a recommendation of the 58th SOW 
Commander dated 1 Apr 2011; the package did not include a 
recommendation from the AETC Commander or his designee. Also 
included in the file was the AFBCMR request for upgrade to the 
AmnM. The AFDB closed the case on 14 Nov 2012 based on the 
AFBCMR application. The AFBCMR application contains an undated 
and unsigned recommendation memorandum by the Vice Commander, 
AETC. The only difference between the initial memorandum signed 
by the AETC CC and the AFBCMR AETC CV memorandum is that the 
AETC CV memorandum is a recommendation only for the applicant 
and does not mention the name of the other Air Force officer who 
was assisting in this act. The applicant provides an email 
documenting a delay in the award recommendation process, and the 
1 Apr 2011 memorandum from the 58th SOW Commander which clarifies 
conflicting information in the original recommendation package. 

 

MRBP states that the applicant has not provided additional 
compelling information that would warrant a change to the 
original AFDB decision. The additional information does not 
expand on the act to show an act of heroism, but expands on the 
act of courage that was previously awarded. 

 

The complete MRBP evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

 


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

On 6 Apr 2013, copies of the Air Force evaluations were 
forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 
30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this 
office (Exhibit E). 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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. After a 
thorough review of the available evidence, we are not persuaded 
the award of the AmnM is warranted. The Board acknowledges the 
act of courage and personal sacrifices of the applicant on 6 Jan 
2008; however, we believe his commander acted within his 
authority in determining the AFCM was the most appropriate award 
for his efforts at that time, rather than the AmnM. While we 
note the administrative delay in processing his award, we do not 
find any evidence that would convince us to conclude that he was 
entitled to a higher level award. Therefore, we agree with the 
opinions and recommendations of the Air Force OPRs and adopt 
their rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant 
has not been the victim of an error or injustice. In the 
absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no basis 
to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 

 

4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not 
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel 
will materially add to our understanding of the issue(s) 
involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably 
considered. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

 


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 in Docket number 
BC-2012-03520 in Executive Session on 15 Jan 2013, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-
2012-03520: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 6 Aug 2012, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSID, dated 17 Jan 2013. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, Letter, SAF/MRBP, dated 27 Mar 2013. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Apr 2013. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair