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.