RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00493 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His deceased father’s records be corrected to reflect he was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC). _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Through his Congressman, the applicant submitted a request for award of the DFC for his deceased father. He states that his mother submitted a request for the DFC for his father on 31 Aug 00; however, it was sent to the wrong address and not on the correct form. His father was informed that he was recommended for the DFC and that his records were reproduced and forwarded to Headquarters Fifth Air Force for processing. After several years of no action, he submitted a follow-up request. He died in 1998, before the follow-up action was finished. In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his father’s Death Certificate, DD Forms 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge, a letter from the former member’s wife to the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC), a letter from the member to HQ USAF Military Personnel Center, a Resume of Combat Tour, Flight Records, a log of planes missing in action, and documents from his Congressman’s office. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The member served on active duty as a Reserve officer from 31 Oct 42 to 30 Nov 57, when he was honorably released from extended active duty. He served 15 years, 11 months, and 23 days on active duty. On 14 Jan 58, the member entered active duty in the Regular Air Force and served until 31 Jan 62, when he was relieved from active duty and assigned to the Retired Reserve Section and placed on the United States Air Force Reserve Retired List effective 1 Feb 62, after serving a total of 20 years and 10 days of active military service. Located in the member’s records was an unsigned recommendation for the DFC, dated 20 Aug 44, for the member’s heroism in action on a strike against Peleliu Airdrome, Palau Islands, on 11 Jun 44. He was a Navigator of a B-24J type aircraft, one of a seven plane formation on a strike mission against Peleliu Airdrome Also located in the member’s records was an approved Air Medal with fourth Oak Leaf Cluster (AM w/4th OLC) for the same aerial flight over the Palau Islands on 11 Jun 44. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial. DPSIDR states that to approve entitlement for the DFC would be considered dual recognition, as the AM 4th OLC was approved and awarded for the same inclusive date and for the same action as the DFC recommendation. DPSIDR located an original recommendation for the DFC dated 20 Aug 44, for the member’s actions on 11 Jun 44, in his official military record; however, it appears the member’s recommendation for entitlement to the DFC was downgraded to the AM w/4th OLC. According to General Order 166, and the accomplished citation, the member was approved for the AM w/4th OLC for his actions on 11 Jun 44, the same inclusive period as the DFC recommendation. The DFC may be awarded to any persons who, after 6 Apr 17, while serving in any capacity with the United States Armed Forces, distinguishes themselves by heroism or extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight. The complete DPSIDR evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 23 Apr 10, 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 (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 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 the member was awarded the AM 4th OLC for his actions on 11 Jun 44, and to approve the DFC for the same period would be considered dual recognition. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no 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-2010-00493 in Executive Session on 7 July 2010, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 29 Jan 10, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIDR, dated 24 Mar 10. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Apr 10. Panel Chair