RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01785 

 INDEX CODE: 107.00 

 COUNSEL: 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His records be corrected to reflect he was awarded the following 
awards: 

 

1. Air Medal (AM). 

 

2. Presidential Unit Citation (PUC), with two bronze stars. 

 

3. Purple Heart (PH) Medal. 

 

4. American Campaign Medal (ACM) (to be administratively 
resolved). 

 

5. Euro-African Middle Eastern Campaign Medal (EAMECM) (to be 
administratively resolved). 

 

6. Prisoner of War (POW) Medal (to be administratively 
resolved). 

 

7. World War II Victory Medal (WWIIVM) (to be administratively 
resolved). 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

The Air Force neglected to award these medals to him upon his 
discharge. He should have been awarded the AM for the five 
combat missions he flew between 10 Oct 43 and 30 Nov 43 in 
accordance with the policy in effect at the time. As for the 
PUC, then known as the Distinguished Unit Citation (DUC), his 
unit was awarded two DUCs for its missions to Kiel, Germany and 
Ploesti, Romania. While these missions preceded his assignment 
to the unit, all members of the unit are entitled to wear the 
award and he is due to be issued them. Finally, he has a 
reasonably valid claim for the PH Medal due to the injuries he 
suffered when his plane crash landed and he was likely treated 
for cuts and hypothermia once he was rescued by the Germans. 

 

 
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a statement of 
counsel and copies of his Certificate of Service, WD AGO 53-55, Military Record and Report of Separation – Certificate of 
Service, and various extracts from a commercial web site, the 
“United States Air Force Military Heritage Database.” 

 

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

 

_________________ ______________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

Available records indicate the applicant enlisted in the Army 
Air Corps on 16 Apr 42 in the grade of private for the purpose 
of attending pilot training. On 25 May 43, he was honorably 
discharged to accept a commission and immediately commenced a 
tour of active duty in the grade of second lieutenant (O-1). 

 

According to the Air Force Historical Research Agency (AFHRA), 
the 44th Bomb Group was twice awarded the DUC for its actions on 
14 May 43 and 1 Aug 43. The applicant arrived in the theater of 
operations on 17 Sep 43. 

 

Air Force historical documents indicate that Eighth Air Force 
had an established policy whereby the AM was awarded upon the 
completion of the first five heavy bomber missions, with 
consideration for additional awards for every five missions 
thereafter. The applicant’s WD AGO Form 100, Army Separation 
Qualification Record, indicates he flew three combat missions in 
the Mediterranean Theater of Operations (MTO) during his 
service. 

 

The applicant’s WD AGO Form 64, Physical Examination for Flying, 
indicates the applicant ditched over enemy waters in Dec 1943, 
but sustained no injuries. 

 

On 17 Nov 45, the applicant was honorably discharged from the 
Army Air Corps due to demobilization and was credited with 
2 years, 5 months, and 23 days of total active service. 

 

On 22 Jul 10, AFPC/DPSIDR notified the applicant of their 
determination of his entitlement to the ACM, EAMECM with One 
Bronze Service Star (BSS), POW Medal, and WWIIVM. 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of 
the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit C. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 
 
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial of the applicant’s request for the 
AM, PUC, and PH Medal, indicating there is no evidence of his 
entitlement to these awards. The AM is awarded for acts of 
heroism or meritorious achievements while participating in 
aerial flight. Any recommendation must be submitted on an 
individual basis, by someone other than the member, who has 
first-hand knowledge of the acts or achievements, or be 
submitted through a member of Congress. A review of the 
applicant’s records revealed no evidence he was recommended for 
the AM. The PUC is awarded to units of the armed forces for 
extraordinary heroism in action against an armed enemy. An 
individual assigned or permanently attached to, and also present 
for duty with, a unit in the action for which the PUC is awarded 
may wear the emblem as a permanent part of their uniform. The 
applicant was assigned to the unit in question on 17 Sep 43, 
after the PUC was awarded. The PH Medal is awarded for wounds 
or death as a result of an act of any opposing armed force. A 
thorough review of the applicant’s record revealed no evidence 
to support the applicant was submitted for or awarded the 
PH Medal. 

 

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIDR 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 13 Aug 10 for review and comment within 30 days. 
As of this date, no response has been received by this office 
(Exhibit D). 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 with regard 
to the applicant’s request for the AM, PUC, and PH Medal. In 
this respect, the applicant has not provided any documentary 
evidence to substantiate his claim that he meets the criteria 
for these awards; 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 
relief beyond that granted administratively is not warranted. 


Therefore, 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 AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2010-01785 in Executive Session on 26 Oct 10, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

  Panel Chair 

  Member 

  Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 27 Mar 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIDR, dated 22 Jul 10. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 Aug 10. 

 

 Panel Chair