Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02021
Original file (BC 2014 02021.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02021

					COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be awarded an additional 10 percent increase in his retired pay 
as a result of receiving the Silver Star for gallantry.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Based on the governing Air Force Instruction (AFI), he should have 
been automatically considered for the 10 percent increase in 
retirement pay.

The 10 percent increase should have been reflected on his special 
order; however, because of a delay in processing his award, an 
incomplete package was submitted which resulted in him not being 
considered for the 10 percent pay increase.

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

While serving as a Staff Sergeant, the applicant was awarded the 
Silver Star for gallantry involving voluntary risk of life.

According to Silver Star citation, on 5 Nov 01, the applicant 
targeted and destroyed an enemy bunker complex.  His team was 
decisively engaged by a well planned and executed counterattack by 
Taliban forces.  With complete disregard for his own personal 
safety and despite heavy incoming small arms fire and rocket 
propelled grenades impacting all around his position, calmly 
remained exposed to coordinated emergency close air support.  With 
nearly all of his host nation forces fleeing in panic and Taliban 
forces closing in on his position, he instinctively and 
successfully directed numerous dangerous close air strikes to 
thwart the enemy's advance.  His personal actions on the 
battlefield were decisive and instrumental in the liberation of 
six northern Afghan provinces and prevented a major defeat of the 
Northern Alliance forces during their campaign to capture Mazer-e-
Sharif.

On 1 Sep 04, the applicant was awarded the Silver Star for 
gallantry per Special Order G-306.

On 1 Sep 14, the applicant retired; he was credited with 20 years 
of service.


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSID recommends denial for award of an additional 10 percent 
increase in retirement pay.  Based on the policy in place at the 
time, the applicant was considered for the additional 10 percent 
increase at the time of his consideration for award of the Silver 
Star; however, the 10 percent increase in retirement pay was 
disapproved by the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council 
(SAFPC).  Due to the practice in place in 2004, the 10 percent 
increase in retirement pay was only indicated on the special 
order, if approved.  

In accordance with AFI 36-2803 (dated 15 June 2001), Section 1.2, 
SAFPC approves or disapproves recommendations for each decoration 
or unit award requiring Secretary of the Air Force (SAF) approval.  
SAFPC determines upon approval entitlement to the 10 percent 
increase in retirement pay for the Silver Star, Distinguished 
Flying Cross, and Airman's Medal when awarded to enlisted members 
for extraordinary heroism.

After a thorough review of the applicant's official military 
personnel record, DPSID was unable to verify the additional 
10 percent increase in retirement pay.  Until 18 Dec 13, there was 
no policy in place to put if the additional 10 percent increase in 
retirement pay was disapproved on the Special Order.  

The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C.

SAFPC recommends denial and concurs with the advisory opinion from 
DPSID.  SAFPC has reviewed the applicant's records, the submitted 
supporting documents, the criteria for an additional 10 percent 
for retirement pay purposes (AFT 36-2803, 2.14.1.2), and the 
advisory from DPSID.  SAFPC concurs with the recommendation to 
disapprove the 10 percent additional retirement pay.  In addition 
to the explanation provided by DPSID about the policy in place in 
2004, the applicant records show that the Decorations Board in Aug 
04 did not approve the additional 10 percent retirement pay when 
they approved the award of the Silver Star.

The complete SAFPC evaluation is at Exhibit D.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant is not clear whether or not the Board was able to 
review copies of his Silver Star citation and narrative to 
determine if his action met the criteria for extraordinary 
heroism, or only noted that the Special Order made no mention of 
an increase to retirement pay (approval or disapproval). 
Therefore, he respectfully requests a full review of his Silver 
Star and supporting documentation for consideration of a 
10 percent increase to retirement pay. 

The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit F.


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 an error or injustice.  We took 
notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the 
merits of the case; however, the Air Force office of primary 
responsibility and SAFPC has adequately addressed the issues 
presented by the applicant we are in agreement with their 
conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of 
injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, 
we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief.

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 issues involved.  
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.


THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; 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-2014-02021 in Executive Session on Wednesday, 11 Mar 2015 under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 13 May 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Pertinent Excerpts from Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 1 Aug 14.
Exhibit D.  Letter, SAFPC, undated.
Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Nov 14.
Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 19 Dec 14, w/atchs.










Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03102

    Original file (BC 2014 03102.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03102 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He receive a 10 percent increase in retirement pay for award of the Airmen’s Medal. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) (SAF/MRBP) review and advise whether the applicant’s award of the Airman’s Medal for heroism on 1 Jul 98 qualifies for...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00613

    Original file (BC-2005-00613.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    However, one team member received an additional 10% retired pay for actions similar to his in conjunction with receipt of the SS. In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided copies of the special order awarding the other team member an additional 10% retired pay, several statements of support for the applicant, and the original submission for the award of the Air Force Cross. DPPPR states Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAF/PC) would have awarded the additional...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01203

    Original file (BC 2014 01203.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C and D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. The Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council approved the award of the AmnM to the applicant for his action, at which time they also considered and disapproved award of the ten...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05538

    Original file (BC 2013 05538.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of the applicant’s request for an additional 10 percent increase in retirement pay. Regarding references to the Secretary of the Air Force (SecAF) and the Chief of Staff, he reiterates that he had no knowledge of whether or not he was approved for the 10 percent retirement entitlement upon approval of the AmnM and his former unit and Air Force personnel officials could find no record of this consideration either. THE BOARD DETERMINES...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03562

    Original file (BC-2012-03562.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03562 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He receive a ten percent increase in his retired pay for being awarded the Airman’s Medal (AmnM), effective 1 Mar 85. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04685

    Original file (BC 2013 04685.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04685 XXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be entitled to a 10 percent increase in retired pay due to his being a recipient of the Airman's Medal (AmnM). The applicant believes the Board should find it in the interest of justice to consider his untimely application because he only recently discovered that all members who receive the AmnM...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00690

    Original file (BC-2012-00690.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On the member’s citation it does not state “extraordinary” heroism, it just states “heroism.” A complete copy of the NGB/A1PS advisory is at Exhibit C. SAF/MRBP recommends denial indicating that there is no evidence of an error or injustice. A determination that extraordinary heroism was or was not involved is made by the Secretary of the Air Force at the time the award is processed.” Since the applicant was a member of the ANG at the time of his act, his AmnM was not evaluated for...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 04457

    Original file (BC 2012 04457.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His records do not indicate that his retirement pay was considered for a 10 percent increase at the time he was awarded the Airman’s Medal. Per AFI 26-3203, Service Retirements, “Since 1979, enlisted members who have been awarded the Silver Star, the Distinguished Flying Cross for heroism in a noncombat action, or the Airman’s Medal have been automatically considered for the additional 10 percent pay...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1995-02742A

    Original file (BC-1995-02742A.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 95-02742 COUNSEL: VFW HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Counsel requests consideration for a ten percent increase in the applicant’s retired pay, retroactive to his retirement date, due to the award of the Silver Star through AFBCMR action in July 1996. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9502742A

    Original file (9502742A.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 95-02742 COUNSEL: VFW HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Counsel requests consideration for a ten percent increase in the applicant’s retired pay, retroactive to his retirement date, due to the award of the Silver Star through AFBCMR action in July 1996. ...