RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01125
INDEX CODE: 107.00
XXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 13 October 2007
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC), the Air Medal Second
Oak Leaf Cluster (AM w/2OLC), and the Presidential Unit Citation (PUC).
_______________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He flew over 17 combat missions; therefore, he believes he’s entitled to
the DFC and an additional oak leaf cluster to his AM. In addition, he
understands he is entitled to the PUC for his participation in mine field
missions with the 504th Bomb Group.
In support of his application, the applicant provides a personal statement,
a copy of his discharge certificate, and a copy of his record of combat
duty.
The applicant’s submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant’s records were destroyed in a fire at the National Personnel
Records Center in July 1973. According to the applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-
55, Enlisted Record and Report of Separation – Honorable Discharge, he
enlisted in the Regular Army Air Corps on 27 April 1944 at the age of 19.
He served as a Remote Control Turret Mechanic/Gunner. He served in the
Japan Air Offensive, China Offensive, and Eastern Mandates. On 22 March
1946, he was honorably discharged in the grade of technical sergeant under
the convenience of the government (demobilization). He served 1 year, 10
months, and 26 days on active duty. His decorations included the American
Service Medal, Asiatic Pacific Service Medal, World War II Victory Medal,
Good Conduct Medal, and Air Medal with one oak leaf cluster (AM w/1OLC).
On 15 August 2006, the Air Force Personnel Center Separations Branch issued
a DD Form 215, Correction to DD Form 214, adding the Asiatic Pacific
Service Medal with three bronze service stars and the Presidential Unit
Citation to the applicant’s records.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPPR recommends denial of the applicant’s request for the award of
the DFC and the AM/2OLC. DPPPR states the applicant’s available military
records do not contain recommendations or special orders to support his
award of the DFC or the AM/2OLC. DPPPR was also unable to verify is
entitlement of these awards from the documentation the applicant submitted.
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 on 25
August 2006, for review and comment within 30 days. 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 an error or injustice. After a thorough review of the
available records, we found no evidence that the applicant is eligible for
award of the DFC or AM w/2OLC. There is no evidence to support he
completed 29 missions required, at that time, for award of the DFC or that
he met any other eligibility criteria for award of the DFC. Prior to
General “Hap” Arnold’s order in 1946 not to award the DFC or AM based
solely on the number of flight missions completed, we note the requirements
for members under 20th Air Force were to award the AM for the 5th and 8th
mission. Under this criterion the applicant would have been eligible to be
awarded the AM twice (AM w/1OLC). The applicant’s records currently
reflect he was awarded the AM twice and is entitled to the AM w/1OLC. In
reference to the applicant’s request for the PUC, evidence does support the
applicant’s award of the PUC and we note the Air Force has administratively
corrected his record to reflect this award. We find no evidence to
indicate the applicant was treated any differently than other military
members with similar accomplishments. Therefore, we agree with the opinion
from the Air Force office of primary responsibility that the applicant is
not a victim of error or injustice in regard to award of the DFC or the AM
w/2OLC. The applicant’s heroism is noted and our decision in no way
lessens the value of his military contributions, nor does it diminish the
high regard we have for his service. Nevertheless, in view of the above,
we find no basis to favorably consider his request for the DFC or AM
w/2OLC.
_________________________________________________________________
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 24 October 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Michael V. Barbino, Panel Chair
Mr. James L. Sommer, Member
Mr. Vance E. Lineberger, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR
Docket Number BC-2006-01125:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 7 Apr 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 15 May 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Aug 06.
MICHAEL V. BARBINO
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-02281
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denying the applicant’s request for the award of the BSM w/1OLC, DFC, AM, PUC w/2OLCs, Combat Infantryman Badge, and Philippine Liberation Ribbon. To grant the member award of the Combat Infantry Badge and the associated BSM w/1OLC would be contrary to the agreement between the Department of the Army and Department of the Air Force established by the Joint Army and Air...
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 | CY2005 | BC-2005-00679
“I did something in 1945 that has never been done before in the history of the Air Force. He believes the basis for his uncle’s request is not the 500 hours of combat flight time but related to another incident. Evidence does; however, support the applicant’s award of the AM with 2OLC for his acts of meritorious achievement in the Pacific Theater and we note the Air Force has administratively corrected his record to reflect this award.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02807
The applicant has earned the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC), the Air Medal with six Oak Leaf Clusters, the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award, the Vietnam Service Medal, the Air Force Longevity Service Award, and the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR recommends denial and states that the applicant has provided the special orders and letters from former crew members who did receive the AFCM...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02015
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends the applicant’s request for award of the DFC and additional campaign credit for the Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal be denied. DPPPR recommends disapproval of the applicant’s request for award of the DFC for actions on 10 October 1944; additional campaign credit for the Asiatic- Pacific Campaign Medal; and, award of the Air Medal with fourth oak leaf cluster for the period 23...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01126
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends the application for upgrade of the awarded AM to the DFC be approved based on the supporting documentation provided by the applicant to substantiate that, as the aircraft commander, he planned, developed, coordinated and lead the rescue mission for which the copilot received a DFC. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01409
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends denial. Any Air Force member or veteran who was awarded the DFC for heroism on or after 18 September 1947 is now authorized to wear the “V” Device on the DFC. The Distinguished Flying Cross is considered a valorous award; therefore, the “V” device is not required and is considered superfluous.
These documents are appended at Exhibit A. DPPPRA stated that the applicant was discharged on 16 Nov 45 and has not provided any documentation showing he made any effort to resolve the issue of additional oak leaf clusters for his DFC or AM prior to this application. A complete copy of this evaluation is appended at Exhibit C. 2 98-01710 APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He stated that he cannot be held responsible for changes in administrative personnel or priorities during war...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: 01-02528 INDEX CODE 107.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He and his crew be awarded an unspecified decoration for destroying enemy jet fighters during a bombing mission from Italy to Berlin, Germany, on 24 Mar 45. On 12 Apr 96, a Congressional representative requested that the applicant and...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01197
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01197 Case 3 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 21 OCTOBER 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect he was awarded the Combat Readiness Medal (CRM). It was awarded to members of the Air Force and Air Force Reserve, and to members of other...