RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04651 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Legion of Merit (LOM). _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was recommended for the LOM by his commander in 1969, which had been boarded and approved; however, the nomination was lost before being sent to Pacific Air Force (PACAF) for final approval. His commander reconstructed the nomination package and sent it forward, but it was lost again. He made inquiries about his award in 1979 and 1981 but his inquiries went unanswered. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of inquiry documentation concerning his award of the LOM, the reconstructed LOM nomination package, and an excerpt of the Air Commando Journal. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who served on active duty from 27 June 1963 to 1 August 1975. He served as an Information Officer and was progressively promoted to the grade of major (O-4). He was honorably discharged effective 1 August 1975 after serving 12 years, 1 month, and 3 days on active duty of which 4 years, 1 month, and 3 days was Foreign Service. According to documents provided by the applicant, he was recommended for the LOM while serving in the grade of captain (O- 3), as Director of Information, 56th Air Commando Wing, Nakhom Airport, Thailand, from 19 July 1967 to 18 March 1968. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: SAF/MRBP recommends denial. MRBP states PACAF Special Order G- 250, dated 9 November 1970, awarded the applicant the Bronze Star Medal (BSM) for the period 19 July 1967 to 18 March 1968. The certified true copy of the BSM citation located in the applicant’s official personnel record is identical to the LOM citation except for the required opening and closing statements. The applicant’s DD Form 214, Report of Separation from Active Duty, date stamped 14 August 1975, lists the BSM in Section 26, Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized. MRBP indicates that based on the information provided by the applicant and documentation contained in his official personnel record, given the presumption of regularity in the conduct of governmental affairs and without evidence to the contrary, they must assume the processing of the recommendation to award the applicant the LOM was appropriately processed in accordance with the governing regulatory guidance in effect at that time. The applicant was appropriately recognized for his service during the period in question with the BSM. The complete MRBR evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 7 June 2012 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, this office has received no response. _________________________________________________________________ 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. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of 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 the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Although the applicant has provided documentation supporting he was recommended for the LOM, we note his award of the BSM covers the same timeframe as in his LOM recommendation. In addition, other than the opening and closing statements, the BSM citation is identical to the proposed LOM citation. Since a member cannot be awarded two awards for the same events/timeframe, we believe it was the approval authority’s determination that award of a BSM was more appropriate than an LOM. In view of the above and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. _________________________________________________________________ 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 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-2011-04651 in Executive Session on 17 July 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-04651: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 18 Nov 11, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBP, dated 21 May 12, w/atch. Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 7 Jun 12.