RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02443
INDEX CODE: 107.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be corrected to show that he was awarded the Distinguished
Flying Cross (DFC) for his extraordinary and heroic actions on 5 Dec
44.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The applicant’s daughters state their father was not presented with
the medals he earned upon being honorably discharged. He received the
majority of his medals after requesting them from the Air Force;
however, he was missing the DFC. His research efforts made him
acutely aware of how critical his efforts were on one aerial mission
to save all nine men aboard their flak damaged B-17. His efforts were
extraordinary and heroic. When they landed safely, the pilot (now
deceased) told him that he would receive a DFC for his efforts. A
recommendation for award of the DFC was submitted through his
Congressman to the Office of Legislative Liaison for award of the DFC.
In support of his request, applicant submits a personal statement,
Letter from SAF/LLI, dated 9 Jun 00, a description of the mission, a
notarized copy of a list of his missions, notarized letters from three
former crewmembers, a letter from the Radioman recommending award of
the DFC, a copy of the entry in the diary of the Co-Pilot, a copy of a
letter from the applicant to his Congressman detailing his submission
for award of the DFC, and a copy of his AWG Form 58, Enlisted Record
and/Report of Separation Honorable Discharge.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Army Air Corps on 22 Aug 42 and was
progressively promoted to the grade of technical sergeant. He was
honorably discharged for the convenience of the government on 19 Oct
45. He served in the European Theatre of Operation from 14 Oct 44 to
24 Jun 45.
During this period he participated in the Rhineland, Ardennes, and
Central Europe campaigns. His report of separation reflects award of
the Good conduct medal, the European African Middle-Eastern Ribbon,
with three Bronze Stars (w/3 BS), the WWII Victory Medal, and the Air
Medal with four Oak Leaf Clusters (AM w/4 OLC).
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial. DPSIDR states in part, that the
applicant wrote through his Congressional office requesting the DFC.
The DFC package with the recommendation was forwarded to the Secretary
of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC), which is the approval
authority. SAFPC disapproved the DFC request on 18 Sep 00. His
daughters subsequently submitted a DFC package with the same documents
previously considered. Applicant has not supplied any additional
information for the SAFPC to reconsider the DFC request.
The AFPC/DPSOO evaluation is attached at Exhibit F.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on
5 Oct 07, for review and comment within 30 days. 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 error or injustice. After a thorough review of the
applicant’s submission and the available evidence of record, we are
not persuaded the applicant should be awarded the DFC. In this
regard, we note that on 18 Sep 00, the SAFPC determined the
recommendations submitted by the applicant, although commendable, did
not meet the requirements for award of the DFC. The applicant has not
submitted any new evidence, and the Board does not find sufficiently
persuasive evidence to override the decision made by the SAFPC. In
view of the above, 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 issue(s) 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 Docket Number BC-2007-
02443 in Executive Session 13 Dec 07, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Panel Chair
Mr. James A. Wolffe, Member
Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 Jul 07, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Available Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIDR, dated 19 Sep 07.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Oct 07.
LAURENCE M. GRONER III
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2007-02598
DPSIDR states, in part, that after a thorough review of the applicant’s great-uncle’s military record, they are unable to find supporting documentation to indicate he was recommended for the award of the SS or DFC. Unfortunately, the applicant cannot recommend his great- uncle for award of the SS or the DFC. WAYNE R. GRACIE Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2007-02598 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04486
and his affidavit, the letter she received from General H., the accounts of this mission by W.S., who flew out of Takhli that day, the affidavit of her father's best friend, the letters from MGen M., and her recollections as a child (her birth certificate verifies kinship, Exhibit N), it is apparent that her father died while trying to save the life of his wingman, Capt B. The applicant provided as evidence a personal affidavit. (Exhibit I) and her father's commander, Col. E.M. (Exhibits L...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01728
It was normal to be awarded the DFC after completing 35 combat missions with the 94th Bomb Group (BG). SAFPC Decorations Board disapproved the applicant’s request and requested additional justification in order to reconsider his request. However, the applicant has not provided any new evidence to SAFPC for consideration.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: 01-02528 INDEX CODE 107.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He and his crew be awarded an unspecified decoration for destroying enemy jet fighters during a bombing mission from Italy to Berlin, Germany, on 24 Mar 45. On 12 Apr 96, a Congressional representative requested that the applicant and...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04215
His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He states the DFC was awarded to a member of his crew who may have found documentation for one particular mission 19 Oct 44. As such, based on the applicants verifiable act of extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight, we believe it would be in the interest of equity and justice to award the...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-03533 (2)
His father was recommended for award of the DFC. The recommendation was reviewed by the chain of command as well as Congressional members at the time, and they did not support award of the DFC and instead awarded him a Letter of Commendation. ________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02073
The SAFPC evaluation is at Exhibit F. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Counsel states, among other things, that but for the applicant’s actions on 5 June 1944, the mission’s command pilot would have been in severe shock and unconscious in a matter of minutes and incapable of the aircraft flight maneuvers for which he was later awarded the Medal of Honor. Based on the established 8th Air Force policy of...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01840
The applicant's chain of command resubmitted the recommendation, however, on 22 Sep 2009, the SAFPC Awards and Decorations Board determined, that although the recommendation was commendable, it did not meet the requirements for the DFC. DPSID states the SAFPC Awards and Decorations Board has considered the request twice and disapproved/downgraded the recommendation to an AM. Regarding his request for the DFC for the Laos mission, although he and another pilot provided statements on the...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00958
On 14 Aug 43, General Arnold sent a memorandum to all Theater Commanders which revised the policy for award of the DFC. Under the revised policy, the DFC could be awarded for acts of heroism in combat flight or extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice;...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC 2009 00958
On 14 Aug 43, General Arnold sent a memorandum to all Theater Commanders which revised the policy for award of the DFC. Under the revised policy, the DFC could be awarded for acts of heroism in combat flight or extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice;...