RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:				DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00540
								INDEX CODE:  107.00
								COUNSEL:  None

								HEARING DESIRED:  Yes

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be awarded the Legion of Merit (LOM) award.
________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His record clearly supports the fact that he earned and should have been awarded a retirement LOM based on the criteria and guidance given in AFI 36-2803 paragraph 1., Table 1.1 (Note 5) - Retirement Award, and that it was an error that the award was not presented upon his retirement.

In support of his request, the applicant has submitted a statement by counsel elaborating on the applicant’s accomplishments, seven (7) officer performance reports, four (4) award citations, two (2) support letters, a board selection letter, an appointment letter, a letter of evaluation, an assignment recommendation, and a special order.  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant was relieved from his Reserve assignment effective 1 July 2002 and transferred to the Retired Reserve Section awaiting pay in the grade of Colonel.  He was credited with 30 years and 29 days of satisfactory Federal service.  Based on his date of birth he will be eligible to receive retired pay on 11 June 2010.

The record reveals that on 13 September 1995 the applicant was honorably discharged from the Air National Guard and transferred to the Air Force Reserve for duty as an Individual Mobilization Augmentee (IMA).

Subsequent to the time he was promoted to the Reserve grade of Colonel and received seven (7) Officer Performance Reports closing 15 August 1996, 15 August 1997, 15 August 1998, 28 June 1999, 14 January 2000, 15 June 2000, and 15 June 2001 in which all performance factors were rated “Meets Standards.”

On 13 January 2000 the applicant was awarded the Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) for outstanding noncombat meritorious service during the period 15 September 1995 to 15 November 1999.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, 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:

HQ USAF/REPS recommends denial of the applicant’s request.  The original submission authority, HQ USAF/XOH, has reviewed the complete application package.  XOH stands by the decision to award the MSM based on the applicant’s leadership attributes, and further review of the records.  The website cited by the member for establishing criteria for LOMs notes “Upon retirement after a long and distinguished career, liberal interpretation of award criteria can be exercised for officers serving in the grade of colonel and above, provided the most recent performance warrants such consideration.”  AFI 36-2803, Table 2.2 note 7, states “…Superior performance of normal duties will not alone justify award of this decoration” and paragraph 2.3.4. notes “…Prepare the decoration using the most recent period of service….”  The guidance clearly provides the recommending official with direction that would allow for consideration of recent performance for establishing the level of the decoration for retirement purposes.

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 9 April 2004, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to counsel for review and response within 30 days.  On 15 April 2004, applicant’s counsel submitted a request to temporarily withdraw the case.  On 22 April 2004, a letter was forwarded to counsel concurring with his request to temporarily withdraw the case.  Applicant and counsel reviewed the case on 4 May 2004.  (Exhibit D)

On 14 May 2004, counsel requested the applicant’s case be reopened, and provided his detailed refutations regarding the recommendations of the Air Force office of responsibility.  The response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E.

On 19 May 2004 the applicant submitted a letter, with attachments, requesting removal and replacement of several pages of his 14 May 2004 response (Exhibit F).

On 22 May 2004, counsel submitted a letter withdrawing his position as applicant’s counsel.  On 25 May 2004 the applicant submitted a letter concurring this action, and requesting that the Board review his appeal based on the evidence submitted to date.  (Exhibit G)
________________________________________________________________

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.  Documentation submitted by the applicant does not support his contention that he should have received the Legion of Merit award.  We reviewed the documentation that highlights the member’s service record; however, we do not find an adequate basis to disagree with the decision of the applicant’s Commander to award the Meritorious Service Medal versus the Legion of Merit award.  In this respect, we note that decorations are awarded at the discretion of the Commander, and appropriately given in accordance with the performance of the individual.  We found no evidence of animus or abuse of discretion, and no compelling 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 probable 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 23 June 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2004-00540:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 12 Feb 2004, with attachments.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ USAF/REPS, dated 29 March 2004
		w/atchs.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 April 2004;
		Letter, Applicant’s Counsel, 15 April 2004;
		Letter, AFBCMR, 22 April 2004.
		Counsel’s Statement of Case Review, 4 May 2004.
	Exhibit E.	Letter, Counsel, dated 14 May 2004, with atchs.
	Exhibit F.	Letter, Applicant, dated 19 May 2004.
	Exhibit G.	Applicant’s Counsel, 22 May 04, w/atch.