RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01378 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. He receive the Silver Star (SS). 2. He receive the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC). ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He should have received the SS for his bravery beyond the call of duty for saving his radio operator’s life by ensuring he parachuted to safety; and the DFC for the missions he flew before he was shot down and became a Prisoner of War (POW). A fellow crewman attests to his bravery. In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of a witness letter, a personal statement, a copy of his WD AGO Form 100, Army Separation Qualification Record, copies of his WD AGO Form 53-55, Enlisted Record and Report of Separation Honorable Discharge, and a copy of his discharge certificate. His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ___________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant was a former Army Air Force member who served on active duty from 12 Apr 43 through 13 Sep 45, as an airplane mechanic gunner. He participated in the Normandy Northern France and Rhineland campaigns. The applicant was awarded the Air Medal with 3 Oak Leaf Clusters (AM w/3OLC) and the European-African- Middle Eastern Service Medal. On 9 Sep 98, the applicant was subsequently awarded the American Campaign Medal; the World War II Victory Medal; the European African Middle Eastern Campaign Medal with 3 Bronze Service Stars; the Army Good Conduct Medal; and the Prisoner of War Medal. The applicant’s WD AGO Form 100 reflects he participated in 29 missions until shot down over Hamm, Germany. He was captured by the Germans and remained a prisoner of war for 9 months. The SS Criteria: It is estimated that more than 20,000 members of the Army received such citations before 1918. A similar device was authorized for Navy and Marine Corps personnel in 1920 which authorized a "special letter of commendation" to be awarded on the recommendation of the Board of Naval Award. Receipt of this special letter of commendation authorized its recipient to wear a small silver star on the ribbon of the Victory Medal. The Silver Star is currently awarded by all branches of the armed forces to any person who, while serving in any capacity, is cited for gallantry in action against an enemy of the United States while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing foreign force, or while serving with friendly forces against an opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party. The Army announced that anyone who had previously earned a Citation Star could apply for the Silver Star medal. Navy and Marine Corps personnel could only apply if they were awarded a citations star by the Army. The status of the Silver Star was further clarified, when on Aug. 7, 1942, Congress authorized the award of the Silver Star to any person who, while serving in any capacity with the Navy since Dec. 6, 1941, distinguished himself by gallantry and intrepidity in action, but not of a nature to justify the award of the Navy Cross. Four months later, on Dec. 15, 1942, the decoration was extended to Army personnel for gallantry in action, but not of a degree to justify an award of the Distinguished Service Cross. 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. In 1944, the Eighth Air Force had an established policy whereby a DFC was awarded upon the completion of 35 combat missions. ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial. DPSIDR states the applicant contends he saved a crew member’s life by pushing him out of a much damaged B-24 aircraft; however, without official documentation to verify his entitlement to the SS and DFC, they cannot support his request. The DPSIDR complete evaluation is at Exhibit B. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant responded by providing copies of his Individual Flight Record (IFR) that reflects “33” versus “29” missions. He is not sure why the WD AGO Form 100 reflects the “29” since the “33” missions are certified correct by the operations officer. 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 error or injustice. The applicant contends he is entitled to the DFC based upon his completion of 33 combat missions. However, during the period in question, the Eighth Air Force, to which the applicant was assigned, had an established policy of awarding the DFC for completion of a total of 35 combat missions. Further, in 1943, theater commanders were ordered not to award the DFC based solely on the number of combat missions completed; and, each decoration had to have a signed and endorsed justifiable recommendation based on heroism and/or achievement, which distinguished the recipient from members of his crew. We find no evidence the applicant was ever recommended for award of the DFC. With regard to the applicant’s request of entitlement to the SS, we took note of the supporting statement from a fellow crewman; however, he has provided no documentation to support he was recommended for award of the SS. Therefore, we agree with the assessment of the Air Force office of primary responsibility that without official documentation verifying the applicant’s entitlement to the DFC and SS, we find no basis to recommend approval. The personal sacrifice the applicant endured for our country is noted; however, insufficient evidence has been presented to warrant corrective action. In view of the above, 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-2010-01378 in Executive Session on 19 Jan 11, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 6 Apr 10, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIDR, dated 21 Jun 10. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Jun 10. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 6 Aug 10, w/atchs. Panel Chair