RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2020-01942

XXXXXXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL: NONE
	
	HEARING REQUESTED: YES

APPLICANT’S REQUEST

His retirement pay be increased by 10 percent.

APPLICANT’S CONTENTIONS

His Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) was not considered for the 10 percent pay increase when it was awarded, in accordance with (IAW) AFI 36-3203, Service Retirements, paragraph 7.11.3.  

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant is a retired Air Force master sergeant (E-7). 

On 6 Sep 02, according to documents submitted by the applicant, he was awarded the DFC, for heroism while participating in aerial flight as Pararescueman, near Paktia Province, Kabul, Afghanistan, from 2 Mar 02 to 3 Mar 02.  

On 30 Sep 02, the applicant was honorably discharged, and retired effective 1 Oct 02, having served 24 years, 1 month, and 3 days of active service.

For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisory at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION

SAF/MRBP, recommends denying the application.  The applicant contends that paragraph 7.11.3 of AFI 36-3203 indicates he is authorized consideration for the additional 10 percent.  However, the excerpt the applicant is citing is taken out of the larger context of paragraph 7.11, which indicates enlisted members who had deeds of extraordinary heroism may be entitled to receive ten percent additional retired pay.  Paragraph 7.11.2, states: “the SecAF has the authority to evaluate the heroic actions that have earned the Silver Star, Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) (noncombat), and the Airman’s Medal to determine if extraordinary heroism was involved which would entitle the recipient to the increase in retired pay.”  The applicant is not entitled to consideration for the additional 10 percent in retired pay because his DFC was awarded under combat conditions.  While his actions earning him the DFC were noteworthy, the governing instruction clearly limits the Secretary’s authority to award the 10 percent for a DFC awarded under noncombat conditions.

The complete advisory opinion is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION

The Board sent a copy of the advisory opinion to the applicant on 16 Feb 21 for comment (Exhibit D), but has received no response.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

1.  The application was not timely filed.

2.  The applicant exhausted all available non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.  After reviewing all Exhibits, the Board concludes the applicant is not the victim of an error or injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of SAF/MRBP and finds a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  The Board also notes the applicant did not file the application within three years of discovering the alleged error or injustice, as required by Section 1552 of Title 10, United States Code, and Air Force Instruction 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR).  While the applicant asserts a date of discovery within the three-year limit, the Board does not find the assertion supported by a preponderance of the evidence.  The Board does not find it in the interest of justice to waive the three-year filing requirement.  Therefore, the Board finds the application untimely and recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

4.  The applicant has not shown a personal appearance, with or without counsel, would materially add to the Board’s understanding of the issues involved.

RECOMMENDATION

The Board recommends informing the applicant the application was not timely filed; it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay; and the Board will reconsider the application only upon receipt of relevant evidence not already presented.

CERTIFICATION

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2020-01942 in Executive Session on 6 Apr 21:

, Panel Chair 
, Panel Member
Panel Member

All members voted against correcting the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 16 Jun 20.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion, SAF/MRBP, dated 13 Feb 21.
Exhibit D:	Notification of advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 16 Feb 21.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings pertaining to Docket Number BC-2020-01942, as required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.