RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-00625
                                       INDEX CODE:  107.00
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX               COUNSEL: NO

      XXXXXXXXXXX                            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  23 August 2006


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to reflect the award of the Air Medal (AM).
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He is entitled to the AM for his service in  the  China,  Burma,  and  India
(CBI) Theater of Operations,  World  War  II,  from  22  March  1945  to  25
December 1945.  This is especially true for his service from  25 April  1945
through 12 August 1945,  when  he  was  in  a  designated  Combat  Area  and
hostilities had not ceased.

In support of his application, he provides a personal statement  and  copies
of his flight records documenting the missions he flew, his  Certificate  of
Service, a newspaper article, award certificate from the Chinese Air  Force,
a letter of commendation from his  commanding  officer,  and  correspondence
from his requests for the AM through the  NPRC  and  his  Congressman.   The
applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

According  to  the  limited  service  records  available  for  review,   the
applicant was commissioned a second  lieutenant,  Army  Air  Corps  with  an
aeronautical rating of  pilot  and  ordered  to  active  duty  effective  14
January 1943.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of  captain.   The
applicant served outside the continental United States from  22  March  1945
to 23 December 1945.

On 26 February 1946, the applicant was honorably relieved from active  duty.
 He served 3 years, and 13 days on active duty of which 9 months and 2  days
was Foreign Service.  The applicant’s WD AGO Form 53,  Military  Record  and
Report of Separation Certificate of Service, reflects award of the  Asiatic-
Pacific Campaign Medal with two  Bronze  Stars,  American  Theater  Campaign
Medal, and the World War II Victory Medal.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPR  recommends  disapproval.   DPPPR  states  the   applicant   sent
requests to the National Personnel Record Center  on  19  May  1993  and  22
April 2004 for the AM.   Both  times  he  was  sent  the  Fiscal  Year  1996
National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) rules,  Section  526,  as  to  the
correct procedures for processing a decoration.  He was  also  provided  the
General “Hap” Arnold guidance from 14 August 1943, which changed the  “score
card” approach to award the AM.  The new  format  changed  from  nominations
based on number of  missions  flown  (score  card)  to  a  fully  justified,
supervisor or commander-submitted recommendation outlining a heroic  act  or
extraordinary achievement in aerial flight.  The  applicant  apparently  did
not respond to the provided guidance.  DPPPR states that  after  a  complete
review  of  the  applicant’s   official   military   record   and   provided
documentation, they were unable to verify his entitlement  to  the  AM.   In
addition, they were unable to find any evidence of a recommendation for,  or
award of, the AM.  The DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:


He is very disappointed to receive the Air Force’s  recommendation  to  deny
his request for the AM.  He never claimed he was recommended for the  award;
however, he has provided a lot of information and  documentation  supporting
his entitlement for the AM.  The applicant’s rebuttal 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  available
records, we found no evidence that the applicant is eligible for  the  award
of the AM.  We note the applicant’s  assertion  that  he  should  have  been
awarded the AM for flying 10 missions in  the  CBI  Theater  of  Operations;
however, the criteria for award of the AM was changed  effective  14  August
1943 by the General “Hap” Arnold guidance  to  award  personnel  for  single
acts of heroism or meritorious achievements while  participating  in  aerial
flight in actual combat in support of operations instead of  for  number  of
missions.  The applicant served in the CBI Theater of  Operations  in  1945,
well after the change in policy.  There is no indication in the  applicant’s
record that he was recommended  for,  or  awarded,  the  AM,  nor  is  there
evidence to indicate he was treated  any  differently  than  other  military
members with similar accomplishments.  In the absence of  such  evidence  we
agree with the opinion from the Air Force office of  primary  responsibility
that the applicant’s achievement does not  meet  the  requirements  for  the
award of the AM.  The personal  sacrifice  the  applicant  endured  for  his
country is noted and the recommendation to deny the requested relief  in  no
way diminishes the high regard we have for his  service.   Nevertheless,  in
view of the above, we find no basis to favorably consider 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 this application in  Executive
Session on 28 July 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Renee M. Collier, Member
                 Mr. Terry L. Scott, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with  AFBCMR
Docket Number BC-2005-00625:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Feb 05, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/ DPPPR, dated 16 Mar 05.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Mar 05.
      Exhibit E.  Applicant’s Rebuttal, dated 30 Mar 05.




                                                   KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
                                                   Panel Chair