AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 
DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-00078 
COUNSEL:  NONE 
HEARING DESIRED: YES 

IN THE MATTER OF: 
   
   
 
    
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
1. He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC). 
 
2.  He  be  awarded  the  First  Oak  Leaf  Cluster  (OLC)  to  his  Air 
Medal (AM). 
 
3. His DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of 
Transfer  or  Discharge,  be  corrected  to  reflect  his  Vietnam 
service,  rather  than  Southeast  Asia  (SEA)  –  administratively 
corrected. 
 
4. He be awarded awards and decorations for being assigned to the 
606th  Special  Operations  Squadron  for  the  period  of  May  through 
Dec 68 – administratively corrected. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
He  was  attached  to  the  606th  Special  Operations  Squadron  flying 
combat  missions  in  Laos  and  North  Vietnam.    He  provides 
documentation  that  shows  his  service  in  Vietnam.    After 
completing  a  tour  in  Germany,  he  discovered  that  he  had  not 
received the DFC award.   He queried the awards official to find 
out what happened to his award and was assured the recommendation 
had been sent to 7th Air Force; where it apparently went missing.  
It bothers him that his records were never updated and he would 
like them fixed now.   
 
In  support  of  his  request,  the  applicant  provides  a  personal 
statement,  and  excerpts  from  his  master  personnel  file,  to 
include a citation for the award of the DFC. 
 
His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.  
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
The  applicant  retired  from  the  Regular  Air  Force  on  30  Sep  73 
after serving 20 years, 6 months, and 25 days on active duty. 
 
 
 

AFPC/DPSIDR was able to verify the applicant’s records should be 
updated with the following awards: 
 
  Presidential Unit Citation (PUC) 
  Vietnam Service Medal with one Silver Service Star (VSM  
  w/1 SSS) 
  Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm (RVNGC w/P) 
  Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal (RVCM) 
 
On 8 May 12, AFPC/DPAPP advised the applicant they were able to 
confirm his boots on ground foreign service time at Nakhon Phanom 
Royal Thai Air Force Base, Thailand, and that while assigned in 
Thailand,  he  flew  numerous  combat  mission  into  the  Republic  of 
Vietnam during the period of 23 May 1968 to 30 September 1968.  
 
The  DFC  criteria:    This  medal  is  awarded  to  any  officer  or 
enlisted  person  of  the  Armed  Forces  of  the  United  States  who 
shall have distinguished her/himself in actual combat in support 
of operations by heroism or this medal is awarded to any officer 
or enlisted person of the Armed Forces of the United States who 
shall have distinguished her/himself in actual combat in support 
of  operations  by  heroism  or  extraordinary  achievement  while 
participating  in  an  aerial  flight,  subsequent  to  November  11, 
1918.  
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
AFPC/DPSIDR  recommends  denial.    With  regard  to  the  applicant's 
request to be awarded the DFC, DPSIDR notes that the DFC is not 
awarded for sustained operational activities and flights.  Based 
on the evidence of record, they believe the AM was approved and 
the DFC was disapproved.  Further, due to the fact the applicant 
has already received the AM for the inclusive dates of 23 May 68 
to  30  Sep  68;  if  he  received  the  DFC  it  would  constitute  dual 
recognition as his actions on 22 Jul 68 were incorporated in the 
inclusive period of the AM.  Addressing the applicant’s request 
to  be  awarded  the  AM  1/OLC,  the  applicant  did  not  provide  any 
documentation  that  supports  this  request.    In  addition,  the 
applicant  has  not  exhausted  all  administrative  avenues  and  his 
package is incomplete.   
 
The complete DPSIDR evaluation is at Exhibit B. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
The applicant agrees with the DPSIDR evaluation that there is no 
signed recommendation for the DFC.  He should have followed up on 
his  original  requests  for  this  award,  but  as  he  has  mentioned 
before, his duties at his new assignment led him to shelve the 
matter.    However,  he  did  try  to  contact  his  aircraft  commander 

 

2 

who  informed  him  that  he  had  been  recommended  for  the  DFC.  
Further, the long passage of time really goes against his request 
for the DFC and he only blames himself for not zealously pursuing 
the matter sooner. 
 
The applicant’s complete submission is at 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  injustice.    We  took 
notice  of  the  applicant's  complete  submission  in  judging  the 
merits  of  the  case;  however,  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  already  granted  administratively  is  not 
warranted.    The  military  member’s  honorable  service  is  noted.  
Regrettably, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find 
no basis to recommend granting the requested relief. 
 
4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not 
been  shown  that  a  personal  appearance  with  or  without  counsel 
will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.  
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
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-2012-00078 in Executive Session on 24 Jul 12, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 

 

3 

  Panel Chair 
  Member 
  Member 

 
 
 
 
The following documentary evidence for Docket Number BC-2012-00078 
was considered: 
 
    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 9 Dec 11, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIDR, dated 23 May 12. 
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Jun 12. 
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 15 Jun 12. 
 
 
 
 
                                    
                                   Panel Chair 
 

 

4