RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02297 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) awarded 1 Apr 05 be upgraded to the Bronze Star Medal (BSM). APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Title 10 U.S.C. Section 1133 establishes criteria for BSM eligibility stating it is authorized when a member is receiving special pay for duty subject to hostile fire or imminent danger. Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 1348.33-M states the BSM is authorized while a member is engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing force. The MSM was created as the non-combat counterpart to the BSM. DoDI 1348.33-M states the MSM is for non-combat meritorious achievement. He should have been awarded the BSM for accomplishments during his deployment in support of OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM because the MSM is only awarded for non-combat support. He provides copies of the MSM and BSM fact sheets, the related DoDI pages, and the MSM citation stating “delivered world-class combat support to 1,900 troops….” The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 15 Jun 84, the applicant entered the Regular Air Force. On 1 Apr 05, the commander of United States Central Command Air Forces (USCENTAF) signed the citation to accompany the award of the MSM with second Oak Leaf Cluster (w/2OLC), awarded to the applicant for distinguishing himself by outstanding achievement as the Personnel Support for Contingency Operations Team Superintendent, Kirkuk Regional Air Base, Iraq. On 14 Apr 05, he was awarded the MSM, by Special Order G-1988, for outstanding non-combat meritorious achievement during the period 31 Aug 04 through 10 Jan 05. On 31 Jan 09, the applicant was relieved from active duty and retired, effective 1 Feb 09. He was credited with 24 years, 7 months and 16 days of active service including 3 years, 6 months and 28 days of foreign-service. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends the Board determine whether the applicant’s act/achievement warrants upgrade to the BSM. While his MSM w/2OLC states he endured rocket attacks while deployed, the majority of the citation is for his non-combat administrative accomplishments regarding updating of records and streamlining various systems issues. The BSM is governed by Executive Order 11046, which authorizes the Secretary of a Military Department to award the BSM to any person, who while serving in any capacity with the United States Armed Forces, distinguishes himself or herself by heroic or meritorious achievement or service, not involving participation in aerial flight; while engaged in an action against an enemy of the United States; while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing foreign force; or while serving with friendly foreign forces engaged in an armed conflict against opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party. While the BSM is awarded for service to members who were physically present within a designated combat zone, the MSM is also authorized for service within a designated combat zone but for service that does not rise to the level of the BSM. Per USCENTAF Decoration Guidebook dated 27 Dec 04, A2.9, the MSM is awarded for outstanding non-combat meritorious achievement or service to the United States. Do not award for aerial achievement. Individuals stationed within the area of responsibility, but who do not meet the qualifications for the BSM, may be awarded the MSM. The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C. SAFPC does not recommend upgrade to the BSM. SAFPC agrees with the DPSID advisory in that either the MSM or the BSM could be awarded. While there was mention of “enduring rocket attacks” while deployed, the overwhelming majority of the narrative, and all of the actions attributed to the member, are of an administrative nature and do not meet the criteria for a BSM. The complete SAFPC evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant submitted a response highlighting three areas of concern with the advisories he received. First, award of the MSM is inappropriate given he qualifies for the BSM. Mr. XXXXX letter states the executive order and quotes the USCENTAF Decoration Guidebook dated 27 Dec 04 as “authority.” In paragraph C of his background information he quotes the guide as saying: “Individuals stationed within the area of responsibility, but who do not meet the qualifications for the BSM, may be awarded the MSM.” If eligible for the BSM, then award of the MSM is inappropriate. Neither advisory states he is ineligible for the BSM. Second, Title 10 Section 1133 (attachment 7 of his original package), changed the requirements for award of the BSM and is retroactive to 30 Oct 00. Neither advisory addressed the change in eligibility requirements for the BSM. However, they confirm that the law has not yet been considered or applied if they are quoting a 27 Dec 04 USCENTAF decoration guide. There is no way the guidebook can be correct if the law changed in 2011 with an effective date of 2000—the guidebook they are following is dated 2004. Third, Department of Defense Manual (DoDM) 1348.33v3 change 2 published 13 Mar 15 finally brings together all requirements and the law for eligibility of the BSM into three primary elements: 3.1. Not involved in aerial flight; he met this requirement; 3.2. Engaged in actions or operations involving conflict with an opposing force; he met this requirement; 3.3. At the time of the events be eligible for hostile fire or imminent danger pay; he met this requirement. When the eligibility requirements for the law and the USCENTAF guidebook are compared, the facts quoted in the DPSID advisory make him eligible for the BSM. Since he is eligible for the BSM, the MSM is inappropriate. Finally, he feels compelled to provide the official Air Force position on the basic scope of duties for Personnel Support for Contingency Operations (PERSCO) from AFI 36-3802, chapter 5. PERSCO is everything the personnel community does to support the warfighter. The PERSCO teams are responsible for Total Force accountability and reporting, casualty reporting and providing personnel program advice. The DPSID and SAFPC advisories provide their opinion of the duties he performed as “administrative in nature” and “support to those actually providing combat support.” Nowhere in the DoDM is there a requirement for the BSM to be based solely upon combat related duties, just that it be combat related to or providing support thereto. The complete APPLICANT review is at 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 an error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission, including attachments and his rebuttal, in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. While we note the applicant’s argument in response to the advisory opinion rendered in this case that the MSM was not a legitimate form of recognition for his contributions in the area of responsibility, we are not convinced that this is the case. In this respect, we note that the law quoted by the applicant indicates “The decoration known as the “Bronze Star” may only be awarded to a member of a military force who (1) at the time of the events for which the decoration is to be awarded, was serving in a geographic area in which special pay is authorized under section 310 or paragraph (1) or (3) of section 351(a) of title 37; or (2) receives special pay under section 310 or paragraph (1) or (3) of section 351(a) of title 37 as a result of those events;” however, our review of this statute and the excerpts of the policy provided do not indicate to us that the MSM was not a legitimate option for the commander to choose when determining the appropriate decoration for the applicant’s actions. Additionally, DoDM 1348.33 v3, change 2, as referenced by the applicant, also states in chapter six, paragraph c(1)(b) that “The MSM may be awarded for outstanding achievement or service while serving in a designated combat zone or areas authorized for hostile fire pay, imminent danger pay, or hazardous duty pay.” 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 documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-02297 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 May 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSID, dated 7 Oct 14. Exhibit D. Memorandum, SAFPC, dated undated. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 May 15.