RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  01-02298
		INDEX CODE:  128.14
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be reconsidered for award of the additional 10 percent retirement pay authorized for Airman's Medal (AM) recipients. 

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was awarded the AM by the Secretary of the Air Force (SecAF) for his heroism after he responded to an operational accident involving the explosion of a nuclear-tipped Inter-continental Ballistic Missile (ICBM).  The accident involved a wide spectrum of dangers that included nuclear weapons, toxic rocket fuels, explosions, 21 injuries (including himself) and death.  He risked his life and went into an area thought to have been saturated with radiation and poisonous gases.  

Upon applying for retirement he submitted the paperwork requesting the additional 10 percent retirement pay authorized for those who received the AM for extraordinary acts of heroism.  He was told that his request was disapproved by the vice Commander-in-Chief, Strategic Air Command (CINCSAC).  The decision to deny his request does not rest with the CINCSAC, rather, the SecAF, who was never presented that option

In support of his request, applicant provided recommendation letters, photographs of the accident scene, copies of newspaper articles pertaining to the accident, a copy of special order GB-178, his AM citation, a copy of Senate Resolution 529, and an excerpt from "Into the Mouth of the Cat."  His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 2 Jan 68.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of senior master sergeant, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 8 Nov 85.  He was voluntarily retired from the Air Force on 31 Jul 88.  He served 20 years, 6 months, and 29 days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRRP reviewed this application and recommends denial.  DPPRRP states that the 10 percent increase in retired pay for extraordinary heroism is not automatic to all retiring members who have been awarded a decoration for heroism.  The law gives the SecAF the responsibility for determining what constitutes extraordinary heroism in individual cases.  On 26 Mar 81, the SecAF Personnel Council considered his case and determined that extraordinary heroism was not involved in the circumstances described in the citation awarding him the AM.  Therefore he is not entitled to a 10 percent increase in retired pay.  By law, that determination is conclusive for all purposes.  The DPPRRP 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 21 Dec 01, for review and response within 30 days.  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 probable error or injustice.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case.  Although we find his actions which led to his award of the Airman's Medal commendable, we see no evidence of either an error or an injustice in this case.  In this regard, we took note that the SecAF Personnel Council previously considered him for award of the additional 10 percent retired pay prior to his retirement from the Air Force.  It is our opinion that the SecAF Personnel Council, who is authorized to make decisions in these matters on behalf of the Secretary, is in the best position to make this determination.  Evidence has not been provided which would lead us to believe that their decision was erroneous or unjust.  Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  In the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

We feel compelled to inform the applicant that he may submit an application to the SecAF Personnel Council requesting a one-time reconsideration of their decision and we highly encourage him to do so.

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 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 probable 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 this application in Executive Session on 31 Jan 02, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Aug 01, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRRP, dated 13 Dec 01, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 21 Dec 01.