RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-04106
INDEX CODE: 107.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be corrected to show he was awarded the Distinguished
Flying Cross (DFC) instead of the Air Medal First Oak Leaf Cluster (AM
1/OLC) during the period 15 August 1970.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) awarded him
the AM 1/OLC after he submitted a request through congressional
channels for award of the DFC. He is grateful for the award, but
believes his achievement was one of significance and extraordinary
actions that warrants the DFC. He was assigned in Thailand and while
flying an EC-121-R airplane after a combat mission, he experienced
complete hydraulic failure of flight controls prior to landing. If it
were not for his exact timely situational awareness and orders given
to both the engineer and co-pilot, the plane may have never recovered.
The squadron folded the following January and he was sent to Korea
within three days. It was his understanding that he was to be
submitted for a DFC for recovering the aircraft and saving the lives
of 20 crewmembers and himself. Unfortunately, he was never submitted
for the award.
In support of his request, applicant submits a personal statement,
Letter from Senator John McCain, Narrative of Achievement, Air Force
Times Articles, letter from AFPC/DPPRSP, with corrected DD Form 215,
Correction to DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from
Active Duty, a copy of his Retirement Orders, and a copy of a letter
from Senator Thurmond.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant’s military personnel records reflect that the applicant
served on active duty as a commissioned officer from 15 February 1953
through 31 August 1975, and retired in the grade of Lieutenant
Colonel. He served in Thailand from 12 August 1970 through 5 February
1971. He received an Airman’s Medal and an Air Force Commendation
Medal (AFCM) for his tour of duty in Thailand. His report of
separation reflects award of the Air Medal, Meritorious Service Medal,
Air Force Commendation Medal, the World War II Victory Medal, Army
Commendation Medal, Combat Readiness Medal, Armed Forces Expeditionary
Medal with (2BSS), National Defense Service Medal with (1BSS), Vietnam
Service Medal with (1SS/RVN), and the Armed Forces Reserve Medal.
In 1996, the applicant requested award of the DFC as an end-of-tour
decoration for his tour in Thailand and the Joint Service Commendation
Medal (JSCM) for a flight from Hawaii to Wake Island in 1975. On 19
November 1996, he was informed that there was no indication in his
records that he had been recommended for a DFC and, since he was not
assigned to a joint billet in Hawaii, he was not eligible for the
JSCM. He was informed that he needed official documents showing a
recommendation had been submitted into official channel. In 2001, the
applicant submitted a DD Form 149 requesting award of the DFC for a
specific mission returning from Vietnam to Thailand when his aircraft
suffered hydraulic failure, and he landed the aircraft safely. The
application was returned on 8 January 2002, without action and, again,
the applicant was informed that he needed to obtain a signed and
endorsed recommendation package and submit it through congressional
channels. In 2003, the applicant submitted a request through
congressional channels for award of the DFC for actions on 15 August
1970. The Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council Board denied
award of the DFC, but awarded the applicant the AM 1/OLC for
meritorious achievement on 15 August 1970.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPPR recommends denial. If the applicant desires, he may
contact his recommending official to exercise the procedures for
requesting reconsideration of the DFC. Initially the applicant
requested award of the DFC for an end-of-tour (Thailand) decoration.
However, he received an Air Medal for this tour, and the order was
published in August 1979, eight months after his departure from
Thailand. Therefore, his commander did not overlook his aerial
accomplishments or achievements. In his second request, the applicant
changed his request to award of the DFC for a specific, but
unidentified date, mission. In his third request (submitted into
congressional channels), the applicant obtained a signed and endorsed
recommendation package from officials in his chain of command, but his
request for award of the DFC was downgraded to the AM 1/OLC. The
applicant received the notification of award of the AM 1/OLC from the
Secretary of the Air Force Liaison office, but they did not include
the statement that there was a one-year time limit to appeal the
Board’s decision. Due to this fact, the recommending official may
request reconsideration of the DFC by providing additional
justification to AFPC/DPPPR.
The AFPC/DPPPR evaluation, attachments, is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on
27 Feb 2004 for review and comment within 30 days. 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 error or injustice. In this respect, we note the
Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) considered a
recommendation to award the applicant the DFC for his actions on 15
August 1970. The SAFPC denied the request for award of the DFC and
awarded him the AM, 1/OLC. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of
record and noting the applicant’s complete submission, we find no
basis to overturn the decision of the SAFPC. Should the recommending
official obtain additional justification for awarding the DFC, he may
provide it to AFPC/DPPPR for consideration. If after such
consideration the applicant still believes his records are in error or
unjust, he may provide additional relevant evidence to this Board for
possible reconsideration. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to
the contrary, the Board finds no compelling basis to recommend
granting the relief sought in this application.
_________________________________________________________________
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 Docket Number BC-2003-
04106 in Executive Session on 25 May 2004, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
Mr. Robert S. Boyd, Panel Chair
Mr. James E. Short, Member
Mr. Albert C. Ellett, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 Dec 03.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 18 Feb 04.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Feb 04.
ROBERT S. BOYD
Panel Chair
The pilot of the 25 August 1972 mission recommends the applicant be awarded the DFC and states that during the mission the applicant played an extraordinary role in pre-planning, coordinating and ensuring the success of reconnaissance and air strikes. As such, they believe he received sufficient recognition for his achievement during aerial flight. Of the Airborne Interpreters who participated in the Rustic Operation, the applicant is one of only two individuals who did not receive at...
The pilot of the 1 December 1971 mission recommends the applicant be awarded the DFC, 1 OLC, and states that due to the applicant’s quick and accurate interpretation of the Cambodian Ground Commander’s requests during the mission, they were able to place seven separate sets of fighters in and around Kampong Thma as close as 100 meters of the friendly forces, preventing the overrun of the city and saving the lives of many friendly Cambodian troops. Applicant’s complete submission, with...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02073
The SAFPC evaluation is at Exhibit F. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Counsel states, among other things, that but for the applicant’s actions on 5 June 1944, the mission’s command pilot would have been in severe shock and unconscious in a matter of minutes and incapable of the aircraft flight maneuvers for which he was later awarded the Medal of Honor. Based on the established 8th Air Force policy of...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02018
The SAFPC evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Neither the applicant nor Colonel M----, the former unit Awards and Decorations Officer, realized the original submission for the DFC had been downgraded to an AM, 6 OLC. In all submissions made by the Rustic FAC Association to date, extenuating circumstances have been detailed noting that then headquarters review and decision authorities...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00420
_________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: In view of his completion of a total of 37 combat missions and based on the Eighth Air Force established policy of awarding an AM upon the completion of every five heavy bomber missions and awarding a DFC upon the completion of 35 combat missions, he should be awarded the DFC and an additional AM. In view of the above, and since the applicant never received a DFC for his completion of a combat...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02508
The AFPC/DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A complete copy of the evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 14 October 2005, for review and response within 30 days. We took note of the documentation provided in support of the applicant's request for award of the DFC for completion of 14 lead crew missions and an additional AM for completion of his last five missions. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03307
The Air Medal (AM) that was awarded to him on 4 November 2002 by the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) is not the appropriate decoration for his actions. The control cables were severed, and the aircraft could not be landed safely without the cables controlling the flaps. DPPPR states the DFC is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by heroism or extraordinary achievement while participating in flight.
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04486
and his affidavit, the letter she received from General H., the accounts of this mission by W.S., who flew out of Takhli that day, the affidavit of her father's best friend, the letters from MGen M., and her recollections as a child (her birth certificate verifies kinship, Exhibit N), it is apparent that her father died while trying to save the life of his wingman, Capt B. The applicant provided as evidence a personal affidavit. (Exhibit I) and her father's commander, Col. E.M. (Exhibits L...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00510
He was never awarded an additional AM for his 26th through 30th combat missions In support of the appeal, applicant submits a statement from the former 67th Deputy Squadron Navigator recommending him for award of the DFC and an additional oak leaf cluster to the AM, and a list of his combat missions. The DFC was established by Congress on 2 July 1926 and is awarded for heroism or extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02255
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02255 INDEX NUMBER: 107.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: ROBERT L. ASTON XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 22 Jan 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded two Distinguished Flying Crosses (DFCs), an additional oak leaf cluster to the Air Medal (AM), and the Army Commendation Medal (ACM). In this...