Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02188-AM
Original file (BC-2006-02188-AM.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2006-02188
            INDEX CODE:  107.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE:  27 JANUARY 2008

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to show he was awarded additional Air Medals.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Air Medals are awarded for every 100 hours of combat time  and  he  has  458
hours.  He was awarded one Air Medal and was told that he could not  receive
the three  oak  leaf  clusters  unless  he  provided  documentary  proof  of
entitlement to the awards.  He is 92 years old and would  like  to  set  his
record straight for those  who  come  after  him.   He  does  not  have  the
documents but would appreciate any information.  He received a  commendation
and a medal from General Hap Arnold, however  there  is  no  record  of  the
award.

In  support  of  his  application,  the  applicant  submits   his   personal
statement, a copy of an award certificate and a copy of a special order.

The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant’s military personnel records were destroyed by fire  in  1973.
Therefore, the facts surrounding his Air Force military  service  cannot  be
verified.  The following  is  the  only  known  information  concerning  the
applicant’s service and was extracted from his separation document.

The applicant was inducted and entered active service into the Army  of  the
United States Air Corps on 17 June 1942 at the age  of  28.   Following  his
successful completion  of  training,  he  performed  duties  as  a  Airplane
Mechanic  Gunner.   He  participated  in  the  China  Defensive  India-Burma
battles and campaigns.  He was awarded the Air Medal (AM), the Good  Conduct
Medal, the Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal w/2  BSS,  the  American  Campaign
Medal, the World War II Victory Medal, and the  Distinguished  Flying  Cross
(DFC) w/1 OLC.   He was credited with 2 years,  3  months  and  11  days  of
active duty service, of which 1 year and 10 days were Foreign Service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends denial of the applicant’s request.   On  14  August
1943, General Henry “Hap” Arnold ordered theater  commanders  not  to  award
the AM based solely on  the  number  of  combat  flight  missions  completed
because he believed this so-called “score card” basis lessened the value  of
the AM and created a negative morale factor.  DPPPPR  states  the  applicant
was awarded the DFC w/1OLC and the AM during the period in question.   There
are no  other  official  documents  in  the  applicant’s  official  military
records to help verify his entitlement to additional AMs.  DPPPR opines  the
applicant was appropriately recognized for his outstanding military  service
in the Pacific Theater.


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.  In his undated response, he  states  in  regards  to  the  photocopy
there were no civilians in the operation. He was a Staff  Sergeant  and  all
the pilot  officers  were  Air  Force.   He  does  not  know  why  the  word
“civilian” is on it (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.  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  Force  office  of
primary responsibility  and  adopt  its  rationale  as  the  basis  for  our
conclusion that the applicant has  not  been  the  victim  of  an  error  or
injustice.  While we appreciate and honor the  applicant’s  service  to  his
country, in view  of  the  above  and  absent  persuasive  evidence  to  the
contrary, we have no basis on which  to  favorably  consider  this  request.
However, if the applicant was to provide a copy of a report with his  flying
hours prior to 14 August  1943,  we  would  be  willing  to  reconsider  his
request for combat hours flown during that time.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate
the existence of probable 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  BC-2006-02188  in
Executive Session on 31 October 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

            Ms. Martha J. Evans, Panel Chair
            Ms. Jan Mulligan, Panel Member
            Mr. Wallace F. Beard Jr., Panel Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Jul 06, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPR dated 1 Aug 06.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Sep 06.
      Exhibit E.  Applicant’s Rebuttal, undated, w/atchs.




      MARTHA J. EVANS
      Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02188

    Original file (BC-2006-02188.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2005 | BC-2005-01524

    Original file (BC-2005-01524.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | bc-2004-00787

    Original file (bc-2004-00787.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Under the revised policy, the DFC could be awarded for acts of heroism in combat flight or extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight (Exhibit C). _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Counsel for applicant states, among other things, that the requested relief should be favorably considered based on the recommendation of the applicant’s former commanding officer and in view of the established...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00916

    Original file (BC-2004-00916.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00916 INDEX NUMBER: 107.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: ROBERT L. ASTON XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) and Fifth and Sixth Oak Leaf Clusters to the Air Medal (AM, 5 & 6 OLCs). In 2001, the AFBCMR awarded a DFC and additional AMs to an applicant who had...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00386

    Original file (BC-2004-00386.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    AFPC/DPPPR states, in part, that although the applicant’s records indicate that he completed a total of 35 combat missions and he has submitted a DFC recommendation signed by his former commander, in 1946, General “Hap” Arnold ordered theater commanders not to award the AM or DFC based solely on the number of combat missions completed, but rather for acts of heroism in combat flight or extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight. Applicant’s records do not indicate he was...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02052

    Original file (BC-2006-02052.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02052 INDEX NUMBER: 107.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: ROBERT L. ASTON HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded two additional oak leaf cluster to the Distinguished Flying Cross and an additional oak leaf cluster to the Air Medal. In 1946, General “Hap” Arnold ordered theater commanders not to award the AM...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01125

    Original file (BC-2006-01125.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. The applicant’s records currently reflect he was awarded the AM twice and is entitled to the AM w/1OLC. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02575

    Original file (BC-2006-02575.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    DPPPR states after a through review of the applicant’s limited military personnel records, they are unable to find evidence that he was recommended for award of the DFC. We note the applicant’s assertion that he is entitled to the DFC for flying over 25 missions; however, we also note the requirements for award of the DFC changed in 1943 from the number of hours or missions completed to an actual recommendation. There is no indication in his records that he was recommended for, or awarded,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | bc-2004-02294

    Original file (bc-2004-02294.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    During the period in question, he was told by a major at base headquarters that upon returning stateside, he would receive the DFC for his completion of a tour of 32 combat missions and an oak leaf cluster to the DFC for his completion of 14 lead missions. Under the revised policy, the DFC could be awarded for acts of heroism in combat flight or extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight. In view of this statement, and given the total number of missions the applicant...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02508

    Original file (BC-2005-02508.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    The AFPC/DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A complete copy of the evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 14 October 2005, for review and response within 30 days. We took note of the documentation provided in support of the applicant's request for award of the DFC for completion of 14 lead crew missions and an additional AM for completion of his last five missions. ...