RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00122

			COUNSEL:  NONE

			HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He receive the ten percent annual retired pay increase he qualified for by being awarded the Airman’s Medal (AmnM) for heroism.



APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Although he qualifies for the ten percent retired pay increase authorized for members who have been awarded the AmnM for heroism, he only received this entitlement once--for the period 1 Dec 76 through 31 Dec 76.  He has never received an acceptable explanation from the Defense Finance and Accounting Services (DFAS) which show his ten pay percent increases over the years.  

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



STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The Airman’s Medal (AmnM) is awarded for heroism involving voluntary risk of life under conditions other than those of conflict with an armed enemy of the US.  The saving of a life or the success of the voluntary heroic act is not essential.  The AmnM is not awarded for normal performance of duties (i.e., Security Forces, Firefighter, Medical, Pararescue, etc.).  

In accordance with Title 10 Unites States Code (USC), §8991, members who are awarded the AmnM for extraordinary heroism receive a ten percent increase in retired pay.  

Under Special Order G-967, dated 6 Jul 67, the applicant was awarded the AmnM for heroism for his actions on 9 May 67.  

Under Special Order AC-29252, Retirement Order, dated 1 Nov 76, the applicant was awarded the additional ten percent retired pay associated with being awarded the AmnM. 

On 1 Dec 76, the applicant retired, and was credited with 22 years, 9 months, and 27 days of active service.   

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C.



AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

DFAS-JFBE/CL recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice.  The applicant’s retired military pay was audited.  His actual initial retired pay entitlement includes the ten percent pay increase for his award of the AmnM for heroism.  The applicant’s pay is computed correctly in accordance with the laws governing military retired pay.  Recommend denial.  

A complete copy of the DFAS-JFBE/CL evaluation is at Exhibit C.



APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 25 Aug 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).  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 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 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 the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice.  Other than his own uncorroborated assertions, the applicant has provided no evidence whatsoever that would convince us that his retired pay has somehow been computed incorrectly.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief.



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-2014-00122 in Executive Session on 2 Dec 14 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 Jan 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, DFAS-JFBE/CL, dated 30 Jul 14.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Aug 14.