RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02635
		INDEX CODE:  107.00
		
		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be awarded three additional oak leaf clusters (OLCs) for his 
Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC).

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He would like three additional OLCs based on his 55 combat 
missions.  

He would also like a replacement DFC medal because he never 
received his.

In support of his request, applicant provided copies of his DD 
Form 214, Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the 
United States, WD AGO Form 53, Enlisted Record and Report of 
Separation, General Order Number 133, dated 6 Mar 52, awarding 
the basic DFC, Air Force Reserve Order Number 202, dated 13 Oct 
53, various photos and articles, and a copy of the DFC citation.

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

________________________________________________________________
_

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant served in the Air Force from 25 Mar 46 to 14 Mar 52.  
He was honorably released from active duty and transferred to 
the Air Force Reserve.  He served a total of 4 years, 11 months, 
and 28 days of active military service.

________________________________________________________________
_

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPR recommends denial of the DFC w/3OLCs.  In 1943, 
General “Hap” Arnold ordered theater commanders not to award the 
DFC or AM based solely on the number of flight missions 
completed, each decoration had to have a signed and endorsed 
recommendation package, and be forwarded through administrative 
channels to the final approval authority.  The timeline for 
submitting decorations to include the DFC and AM is two years 
from the date of the act or achievement.  However, under the 
Fiscal Year 1996 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), 
(Section 526), which was enacted into law on 10 Feb 96, this 
timeline has now been waived.

DPSIDR was able to verify the applicant’s entitlement to the 
Army Good Conduct Medal (GCM), National Defense Service Medal 
(NDSM), United Nations Service Medal (UNSM), and the Republic of 
Korea War Service Medal (ROKWSM), and a DD Form 215 has been 
issued with these changes.

DPPPR’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit B.

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 4 Jan 08, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to 
the applicant for review and comment within 30 days.  To date, a 
response has not been received.

________________________________________________________________
_

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 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 the applicant has 
not been the victim of an error or injustice.  We note his 
records were administratively corrected to add the GCM, NDSM, 
UNSM, and the ROKWSM, however he was not able to present 
conclusive evidence to support his contention he was awarded an 
additional three DFCs.  While we are not unmindful or 
unappreciative of his 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 Docket Number    
BC-2007-02635 in Executive Session on 20 Feb 08, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	



The following documentary evidence pertaining to Docket Number 
BC-2007-02635 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 21 Aug 07, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 5 Nov 07.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Jan 08.