RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00590
INDEX CODE: 107.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 31 AUGUST 2008
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be corrected to reflect he was awarded the Distinguished
Flying Cross (DFC).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He should receive the DFC for his actions in July 1944.
In support of his request, the applicant provided a letter from
National Personnel Records Center (NPRC), Congressional Inquiry from
Congressman Tim Mahoney’s office.
Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is attached at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant’s military records were destroyed in the 1973 fire at the
National Personnel Records Center (NPRC).
The available records reveal the applicant served on active duty in
the Air Corps of the Army of the United States (AUS) from 9 March 1943
through 8 September 1945.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends the requested relief be denied. They state
the DFC is awarded to any servicemember of the Armed Forces of the
United States who shall have distinguished themselves in actual combat
in support of operations by “heroism or extraordinary achievement
while participating in an aerial flight subsequent to 11 November
1918.
They further state no official documentation (special order, citation,
recommendation) was located to verify the applicant’s entitlement to
the DFC. The applicant must provide an official recommendation and
proposed citation for award of the DFC, in order for their office to
submit this request to the Board for consideration.
The applicant may pursue the DFC under the provisions of the 1996
National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The timeline for
submitting decorations is two years from the date of the act or
achievement. However, this Act waived the timeline. The submission
for the award must be written and meet two criteria: 1) be made by
someone other than the servicemember, in the servicemember’s chain of
command at the time of the incident, and, who had firsthand knowledge
of the acts or achievements; and 2) be submitted through a
congressional member who can ask a military service to review a
proposal for a decoration based on the merits of the proposal and the
award criteria in existence when the event occurred.
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on
13 April 2007, for review and response. As of this date, no response
has been received by this office.
_________________________________________________________________
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 an injustice. We took note of the
documentation provided in support of the applicant’s request for award
of the DFC. After thoroughly reviewing the available personnel
records, we found no evidence to verify he was eligible for or
recommended for the award. Nor, is there any available evidence in
the applicant’s records indicating he met the criteria for the DFC.
While we are not unmindful or unappreciative of the servicemember’s
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.
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 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-
2007-00590 in Executive Session on 14 June 2007, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. James W. Russell III, Panel Chair
Ms. Glenda H. Scheiner, Member
Mr. Michael F. McGhee, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number
BC-2007-00590 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Dec 04, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Available Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPR, dated 2 Apr 07.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 Apr 07.
JAMES W. RUSSELL III
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00870
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00870 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 24 SEPTEMBER 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect he was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC). We took note of the documentation provided in support of the applicant’s request for...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02396
He agrees with the recommendation of the Air Force, if his citation does not verify his decision was beyond the call of duty neither the AM or DFC is appropriate (Exhibit E). Congressman Shimkus, in a letter dated 18 December 2006, offers his support in the applicant’s request for an upgrade of AM w/4 OLCs (Exhibit F). On 10 January 2007, the Board staff requested the applicant to provide clarification regarding his request for an upgrade of his AM w/OLCs (Exhibit G).
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02301
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02301 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE: 4 FEBRUARY 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to show he was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) and the Presidential Unit Citation (PUC) awards. It appears he was recommended for the DFC as...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02780
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He received $100.00 at the time of his discharge but never received the additional $200.00. He did not receive the additional AM, nor did he receive the medal the crew officers recommended him for a deed up and beyond the call of duty. The applicant did not provide any documentation to support award of the AM or DFC.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02480
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states he served during World War II from 24 March 1942 through 17 January 1946. He further states he is requesting an OLC not an additional medal (Exhibit E). After thoroughly reviewing the available personnel records, we found no evidence to verify he...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03814
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-03814 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 17 APRIL 2006 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) and the Soldier’s Medal (SM) as recognition for taking charge of surviving military personnel after their C-47 airplane crashed. The...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01790
He completed 492.15 hours of combat mission flight time. The timeline for submitting decorations is two years from the date of the act or achievement. Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. ___________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01676
Documentation provided by the applicant reflects that a citation for award of the DFC was submitted to the PACAF Awards and Decorations Board; the Board disapproved the DFC and recommended no lesser decoration be awarded. In both of the DPPPR evaluations the recommendation was to deny applicant’s request for reconsideration of the DFC. Exhibit C. Letters, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 12 Jun 07 and 17 Jul 07.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00383
He was progressively promoted to the grade of senior master sergeant with an effective date and date of rank of 1 Jul 69. After a thorough review of the deceased military member’s military records they were unable to find evidence of a recommendation for, or award of the DSM. Complete copies of the evaluations are at Exhibit C and F. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The deceased military member’s son reiterated...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01231
The timeline for submitting decorations is two years from the date of the act or achievement. A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states the recommendation to deny his request based on the fact one of the criteria: “be made by someone, other than the member himself, in the member’s chain...