RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-03160
INDEX CODE: 107.00
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx COUNSEL: NONE
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 12 APR 2006
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be corrected to show he received the Silver Star (SS)
Medal.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was submitted for a SS Medal in 1972, but the date for the mission
was in error, as another crewmember submitted the crew for a Defense
Flying Cross (DFC) using the same date.
In support of his request, applicant submits a personal statement, a
copy of his Individual Flight Record, a copy of the Citation and
Certificate for Award of the Distinguished Flying Cross, for 28
December 1972, and a copy of the Citation and Certificate for Award of
the Distinguished Flying Cross w/1 OLC, for 15 April 1972.
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 2 April 1968, and retired
in the grade of lieutenant colonel on 1 July 1994.
His records reflect award of the Distinguished Flying Cross w/1 OLC,
Air Medal w/10 OLCs, Meritorious Service Medal, Combat Readiness
Medal, Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal, Republic of Vietnam
Gallantry Cross w/1 Device, Republic of Vietnam Service Medal, Armed
Forces Expeditionary Medal, National Defense Service Medal, and the
Armed Forces Reserve Medal.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPPR recommends the applicant's request be denied. DPPPR states
an individual cannot receive two decorations for the same act or
period, as this would constitute dual recognition, which is in
violation of applicable executive orders and standing regulations.
There also was no decoration recommendation provided by the applicant
or in his military records to indicate a SS recommendation was
submitted. The applicant did provide copies of an approved basic DFC
and DFC w/1 OLC for his service during Operations LINEBACKER I and II.
DPPPR states no individual can recommend himself or herself for a one-
time reconsideration for decoration upgrade. This must be
accomplished by the recommending official or intermediate authority
within the approval chain for the decoration being considered. The
member did not provide, nor could they locate any documentation in the
applicant’s military records of a one-time reconsideration for
decoration upgrade from the recommending official or intermediate
authority.
The DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant 22
April 2005, respectively for review and response. 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 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. While it appears he
participated in operations Linebacker I and II and was appropriately
awarded the DFC and DFC w/1 OLC for his extraordinary achievement, he
has provided no documentation to support his contention he was
recommended for award of the Silver Star Medal. Therefore, we agree
with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force and adopt its
rationale as basis for our conclusion 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.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of a 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-
03160 in Executive Session on 9 June 2005, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
Mr. Michael J. Maglio, Member
Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 5 Oct 04, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 12 Apr 05.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Apr 05.
RICHARD A. PETERSON
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02176
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. 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. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02396
He agrees with the recommendation of the Air Force, if his citation does not verify his decision was beyond the call of duty neither the AM or DFC is appropriate (Exhibit E). Congressman Shimkus, in a letter dated 18 December 2006, offers his support in the applicant’s request for an upgrade of AM w/4 OLCs (Exhibit F). On 10 January 2007, the Board staff requested the applicant to provide clarification regarding his request for an upgrade of his AM w/OLCs (Exhibit G).
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00935
Further without evidence to verify the applicant was recommended for the SS his request could not be favorably considered. His records do not reflect that he was recommended for, or awarded the SS. Novel, Panel Chair Mr. Reginald P. Howard, Member Mr. James A. Wolffe, Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2006-00325 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 17 Mar 06, w/atchs.
Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Recognition Programs Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPPR, reviewed this application and states that on 25 May 01, they requested the applicant provide a copy of the citations to the basic DFC and all the Air Medals. On 27 Jul 01, DPPPR forwarded the case to the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) for determination of the applicant's...
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-2004-03073
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Her late husband was awarded the SS in World War II, along with other military members; however, he never received it as he was flying a mission at the time. Effective 13 May 1975, at age 60, he was authorized to receive retired pay per section 1331 and 1402, Title 10 United States Code (U.S.C. DPPPR states that the applicant has not provided any official documentation to show that her late husband...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00413
_________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He should receive the DFC and SS with 9 battle stars based on his successful completion of 50 combat missions and since he was shot down 3 times. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR recommends denial of applicant’s request for the DFC and states, in part, that in 1946, General “Hap” Arnold ordered theater commanders not to award the AM...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02340
The complete HQ AFPC/DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 25 Aug 06 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). The OER for the following period, 20 Aug 68 - 14 Aug 69, reported the member had been awarded the DFC for heroism, as well as AMs with 1- 7OLCs. Neither the applicant’s submission nor her...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02470
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02470 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 8 FEB 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect he received the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC), and a Silver Oak Leaf Cluster to the Air Medal (AM w/1 SOLC). A thorough review of the applicant’s...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00870
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00870 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 24 SEPTEMBER 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect he was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC). We took note of the documentation provided in support of the applicant’s request for...