RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2016-02527

						COUNSEL:  NONE
	
						HEARING DESIRED:  YES

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM) be upgraded to an Airman’s Medal.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His awarded AFAM for heroic action on 9 Nov 00 where he risked his life to save six individuals from a burning apartment warrants award of the Airman’s Medal and his actions equate to the actions of an Airman who was awarded the Airman’s Medal in 2015 for thwarting a terrorist attack in France.

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 Senior Master Sergeant, E-8.  On 2 Apr 01, the applicant was awarded the AFAM for a heroic action on 9 Nov 00 where he evacuated and saved the lives of six individuals from an apartment fire and prevented massive property destruction by battling the flames and prevented them from spreading to other residences.

In support of his request, the applicant provided a statement of support from one of the survivors

The Airman’s Medal 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.

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 EVALUATIONS:

AFPC/DP3SP recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice.  Although, the applicant’s actions were commendable it does not appear to meet the established criteria for the Airman’s Medal.  The applicant has not provide any new evidence to support error or injustice and while he provided a statement of support from one of the survivors, he did not provide any statements of support from his chain of command at the time of the incident, a recommendation for upgrade from someone with firsthand knowledge of the act, preferable from the applicant’s chain of command at the time of the act, or a proposed citation.  Without evidence to the contrary it can only be determined the applicant was awarded the AFAM as the appropriate award for recognition of his service as determined by his chain of command and the original award approval authority at the time the act/achievement occurred.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DP23SP evaluation is at Exhibit C.

SAF/MRBP recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice.  Based on the applicant’s request and the rationale provided, SAF/MRBP concurs with the advisory prepared by AFPC/DP3SP, dated 18 Oct 16.

A complete copy of the SAF/MRBP evaluation is at Exhibit D.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 26 Jul 17 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E).  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

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, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of AFPC/DP3SP and adopt its rationale as the basis for our 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-2016-02527 in Executive Session on 9 Nov 17 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records:

				Panel Chair
				Member
				Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 22 Jun 16, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Excerpts from Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DP2SSM, dated 18 Oct 16.
	Exhibit D.  Memorandum, SAF/MRBP, dated 2 May 17.
Exhibit E.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 26 Jul 17, w/atchs.

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), it is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.