RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-02176

            INDEX CODE:  107.00

      XXXXXXXXXXXXXX   COUNSEL:  NONE

      XXXXXXXXXXXXXX   HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC), 4th Oak Leaf Cluster  (4OLC)  be
upgraded to a Silver Star (SS) Medal.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

On 23 February 1969, while on a night mission over  the  Ho  Chi  Minh
Trail, he destroyed  24  trucks,  damaged  2  additional  trucks,  and
silenced an anti-aircraft position, which was firing on  his  gunship.
After he completed the mission, a member of the General’s  staff  told
him that the General wanted to award him  and  another  pilot  the  SS
Medal.  A few days later he was told the other pilot would receive the
SS Medal and he would receive the DFC.  He has always felt cheated  of
the opportunity to wear the SS Medal by the actions of one person.  He
believes he was unfairly awarded the DFC, 4OLC for heroism instead  of
the SS Medal.

In support of his request, applicant submits a personal statement, and
a copy of the Citation To Accompany the  Award  of  the  Distinguished
Flying Cross, 4OLC.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant’s military personnel  records  reflect  that  he  served  on
active duty as a commissioned officer from 15 September  1950  through
30 June 1972 and retired in  the  grade  of  Colonel.   He  served  in
Thailand from 29 October 1968 through 29 October 1969.   His  DD  Form
214,  Report  of  Separation  reflects  award  of  the  Bronze   Star,
Distinguished Flying Cross with 5 OLCs, Air Medal with 11 OLCs, Combat
Readiness Medal, Republic of  Vietnam  Campaign  Medal,  Armed  Forces
Expeditionary Medal with two Bronze Service  Stars,  National  Defense
Service Medal with one Bronze Service Star, Vietnam Service Medal with
one Bronze Service Star, Armed Forces Reserve  Medal  and  the  Korean
Service Medal.

The applicant applied to upgrade the DFC, 3OLC to the Air Force Cross,
which was denied as untimely in 1991.  He  then  requested  under  the
National Defense Authorization Act  of  1996  (NDAA/96),  that  it  be
upgraded to the SS Medal, but was denied by the SAF Personnel  Council
in 1997.  The AFBCMR considered and denied  the  applicant’s  previous
request to have his DFC, 3OLC upgraded to the SS Medal for his  action
on 24 May 1969.

The Record of Proceedings is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPR recommends the applicant's request be denied.  DPPPR states
the applicant feels verification of award recommendations by  the  8th
Tactical Fighter Wing (TFW) during  the  periods  February/March  1969
will substantiate his claim for award of the SS Medal.   He  has  been
denied on previous requests, and has not submitted any new information
that  can  help  to  substantiate  his  claim.   The   applicant   was
recommended for award of the DFC for heroism  while  participating  in
aerial flight on 23 February 1969; his actions at  the  time  may  not
have met the criteria for any decoration higher than the DFC.

The DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant states he regrets the recommendation of  DPPPR  to  deny
his request for upgrade of his DFC.  On  the  night  previous  to  his
February 1969 mission, the crew and another pilot destroyed 24 trucks.
 The pilot was subsequently awarded the Silver Star for that  mission.
He  was  told  at  the  time,  the  8th  TFW  would  only   submit   a
recommendation for one SS Medal and since  the  other  pilot  was  the
first to destroy 24 trucks, he would receive  the  higher  award.   He
does not believe any member of the 8th TFW Awards Review Board,  being
made up of fighter pilots, or any members of AFPC/DPPPR, is  qualified
to judge the dedication and heroism of a flight crew member flying  in
a large 4 engine aircraft, 4500 feet above  the  ground,  night  after
night over the heavily defended Ho Chi Minh Trails.

His complete response 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 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.  After a thorough review  of  the
evidence presented and the evidence of record, we  are  not  persuaded
that award of the Silver Star Medal is warranted.  His assertion  that
he was told that his commanding General wanted to award him the Silver
Star is duly noted; however absent documentary evidence of an official
recommendation  we  do  not  find   his   unsubstantiated   assertions
sufficiently persuasive.  While it appears  that  he  participated  in
aerial combat operations in Vietnam and was appropriately awarded  the
DFC for his extroidinary achievement, he has provided no documentation
to support his contention he should have been awarded  the  SS  medal.
Therefore, we agree with the opinion and  recommendation  of  the  Air
Force and adopt their rationale as basis for our  conclusion  that  he
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.

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 an 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  no   considered   with   this
application.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket  Number  BC-2004-
02176 in Executive Session on 8 February 2005, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:

                 Ms. Barbara J. White-Olson, Vice Chair
                 Mrs. Barbara R. Murray, Member
                 Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 29 May 04, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 23 Sep 04.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Oct 04.
      Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 4 Oct 04.







      BARBARA J. WHITE-OLSON
      Panel Chair