RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00935
INDEX CODE: 107.00
COUNSEL: None
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 8 AUG 07
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be corrected to upgrade his Distinguished Flying Cross
(DFC) to the Silver Star (SS).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was originally submitted for the SS but it was downgraded to the
DFC.
Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is attached at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the New Mexico National Guard on 18 July
1939. He was inducted into active duty on 16 September 1940. He was
honorably discharged on 13 January 1943 to accept a commission. On 14
January 1943, the applicant entered the Army of the United States
(AUS), Air-Reserves as a second lieutenant.
On 19 June 1953 per General Order 408, the applicant was awarded the
DFC with first Oak Leaf Cluster (OLC) for meritorious achievement on
25 November 1952.
On 2 July 1953 per General Order 445, the applicant was awarded the
DFC with second OLC for his acts of heroism on 31 October 1952.
His records also reflect he was awarded the Air Medal with 13 OLCs,
Good Conduct Medal (GCM) Army Defense Service Medal (ADSM), Army
Commendation Medal (ACM), European-African-Middle-Eastern Campaign
Medal (EAMECM), World War II Victory Medal (WWIIVM), Army Occupation
Medal (AOM), National Defense Service Medal (NDSM) with 1 Bronze Star
(BS), Air Force Reserve Medal (AFRESM), Air Force Expeditionary Medal
(AFEM), United Nations Service Medal (UNSM), Korean Service Medal
(KSM), Republic of Korea Presidential Unit Citation (ROKPUC), Air
Force Longevity Service Award (AFLSA) with 5 OLCs, Small Arms Expert
Marksmanship Ribbon (SAEMR), Air Force Outstanding Unit Award (AFOUA),
and the Republic of Vietnam Commendation Medal (RVCM).
The applicant submitted via Senator Domenici office a request to have
his DFC upgraded to a SS. HQ AFPC/DPPPRA in response to the request
informed the Senator’s office that they were unable to verify or
locate any official documentation recommending the applicant for the
SS. They also informed him of the requirements for the 1996 National
Defense Authorization Act to have a decoration upgraded. Further
without evidence to verify the applicant was recommended for the SS
his request could not be favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends the requested relief be denied. DPPPR states
all decorations, with the exception of the Purple Heart, require a
written recommendation. They cannot verify the applicant’s
eligibility for the SS. His records do not reflect that he was
recommended for, or awarded the SS.
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 the reason
there is no documentation for the SS is it was changed before it left
the base. He further states why would he write a letter on the
subject years later to his squadron commander if he had not told him,
and confirmed by the squadron Awards and Decoration officer that he
was citing me for the SS.
His request to get what he apparently deserves hinges on three factors
1) He is telling the truth, 2) Was there any reason to believe that
during that period racial and ethnic factors were a reality throughout
the country and in the Armed Forces and 3) the mission it self
(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 an error or an injustice. We took note of the
documentation provided in support of the applicant’s request to
upgrade his DFC to a SS. A written recommendation must be submitted
through the proper channels in order for a servicemember to receive
the SS. After thoroughly reviewing the applicant’s military personnel
records, we found no evidence to verify he was recommended for the SS.
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-
2006-00325 in Executive Session on 24 May 2006, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Michael J. 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.
Exhibit B. Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPR, dated 11 Apr 06.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Apr 06.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 22 Apr 06.
MICHAEL J. NOVEL
Panel Chair
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...
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-2004-03160
There also was no decoration recommendation provided by the applicant or in his military records to indicate a SS recommendation was submitted. DPPPR states no individual can recommend himself or herself for a one- time reconsideration for decoration upgrade. As of this date, this office has received no response.
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 | CY2006 | BC-2006-00449
DPPPR states the NPRC was able to reconstruct a part of his military record; however, the complete record which may contain the documentation needed for the aforementioned awards was not found. Although the applicant’s entitlement to the requested awards could not be verified though his official records, the Air Force office of primary responsibility has reviewed documentation provided by the applicant, including a citation for the Distinguished Flying Cross and information taken from the...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-03040
Applicant’s AF Form 7, Airman Military Record, Item 10 (Awards), reflects the DFC and Air Medal (1OLC). After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, we find that insufficient evidence has been presented to support award of additional Air Medals. In the absence of such evidence we agree with the opinion and recommendation from the Air Force office of primary responsibility that the applicant did not provide any documentation to support his claim with regards to additional Air Medals.
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-2005-00413
_________________________________________________________________ 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-2006-02188-AM
Therefore, the facts surrounding his Air Force military service cannot be verified. The complete DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant provided a photocopy of the Air Force Exceptional civilian award. We note the memorandum decreed by General “Hap Arnold” in regard to the routine awarding of the Air Medal; therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02188
Therefore, the facts surrounding his Air Force military service cannot be verified. The complete DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant provided a photocopy of the Air Force Exceptional civilian award. We note the memorandum decreed by General “Hap Arnold” in regard to the routine awarding of the Air Medal; therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air...