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).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He flew 35 missions in a B-17 and never received the DFC. He was
overlooked.
In support of his request, applicant provided a copy of his Enlisted
Record and Report of Separation Honorable Discharge and a Consent
Release from Congressman Fitzpatrick’s office.
Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is attached at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant’s military records were destroyed in the 1973 fire at the
National Personnel Records Center (NPRC).
The available records reveal the applicant served on active duty in
the Army of the United States (AUS) from 6 December 1943 through 10
October 1945.
The records further reflect he was awarded the Good Conduct Medal
(GCM), Air Medal (AM) with five Oak Leaf Clusters (OLCs), European
African Middle Eastern Campaign Medal (EAME) with three Bronze Star
(BSs).
On 31 May 2006, HQ AFPC/DPPRSP informed the applicant his eligibility
for the American Campaign Medal and the World War II
Victory Medal had been verified and his records will be
administratively corrected to add the medals to his DD Form 214.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends the requested relief be denied. AFPC/DPPPR
states General Arnold in 1946 ordered theater commanders not to award
the DFC based solely on the number of missions completed; each
decoration had to have a signed and endorsed recommendation package,
and forwarded through administrative channels to the final approval
authority.
HQ AFPC/DPPPR further states the applicant may pursue the AM under the
provisions of the 1996 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The
timeline for submitting decorations is two years from the date of the
act or achievement. However, this Act waived the timeline. The
submission for the award must be written and meet two criteria: 1) be
made by someone other than the servicemember, in the servicemember’s
chain of command at the time of the incident, and, who had firsthand
knowledge of the acts or achievements; and 2) be submitted through a
congressional member who can ask a military service to review a
proposal for a decoration based on the merits of the proposal and the
award criteria in existence when the event occurred.
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation 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 9
June 2006, for review and response. 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 an error or an injustice. We took note of the
documentation provided in support of the applicant’s request for award
of the DFC. After thoroughly reviewing the available personnel
records, we found no evidence to verify he was eligible for or
recommended for the award. Nor, is there any available evidence in
the applicant’s records indicating he met the criteria for the DFC.
While we are not unmindful or unappreciative of the servicemember’s
service to his Nation, in the absence of 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 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2006-00870 in Executive Session on 15 Augsut 2006, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
Ms. LeLoy W. Cottrell, Member
Ms. Karen A. Holloman, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number
BC-2006-00325 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Mar 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Available Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPR, dated 3 Apr 06.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Jun 06.
RICHARD A. PETERSON
Panel Chair
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 | 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-2005-02480
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states he served during World War II from 24 March 1942 through 17 January 1946. He further states he is requesting an OLC not an additional medal (Exhibit E). After thoroughly reviewing the available personnel records, we found no evidence to verify he...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00507
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00507 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 20 AUGUST 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her late father’s records be corrected to reflect award of the Purple Heart (PH). The Purple Heart Review Board (PHRB) considered and denied the request for PH. The documentation...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-03583
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-03583 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE: 12 FEBRUARY 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Air Medal (AM) awarded on 17 Aug 2004 for heroism be upgraded to the Distinguished Flying Cross with Valor (DFC w/V). The Chief of Staff of the Air Force strongly believed another...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02780
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He received $100.00 at the time of his discharge but never received the additional $200.00. He did not receive the additional AM, nor did he receive the medal the crew officers recommended him for a deed up and beyond the call of duty. The applicant did not provide any documentation to support award of the AM or DFC.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01231
The timeline for submitting decorations is two years from the date of the act or achievement. A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states the recommendation to deny his request based on the fact one of the criteria: “be made by someone, other than the member himself, in the member’s chain...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00224
He should have received recognition for the missions by being awarded the DFC. Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR recommended denial indicating that after a review of the applicant’s records and his supporting documentation, they were unable to determine his entitlement to the DFC.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03558
All elements of a DFC for heroism approved (certificate dated) between 18 September 1947 to 2 June 2004 will not be reaccomplished to reflect “Valor”; nonetheless, individuals with these DFCs are authorized to the wear the “V” device.” _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR states the applicant was awarded the DFC for extraordinary achievement and not heroism. Therefore, they recommend the applicant’s request for the “V” device...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01524
During World War II, the Far East Air Force had an established policy whereby a DFC was awarded upon the completion of 500 combat hours and an AM was awarded upon the completion of 100 combat hours. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: AFPC/DPPPR recommends the applicant’s request for the DFC be denied and states, in part, that the applicant did not provide a letter of recommendation to verify his entitlement to the DFC. ...