RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02645
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His late father and the crew of the Night Prowler be entitled
to award of the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) for a bombing
mission on 15 Jul 45.
________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
As documented in the Herb Bach Diary, the record shows that
both the DFC and the Silver Star were awarded to the aircraft
commander during that mission. The crew, including his father,
was promised that they would all receive the DFC. The aircraft
during this 17 hour mission, on 15 Jul 45, was piloted by both
the commander and his father. The success of the mission
depended on both of them in bringing the crew back safely, with
only three engines, full of flak, and no remaining ammunition.
His father always talked about the mission; however, no proof
was ever found until the Herb Bach Diary, and the story of
Jesse O, was found on the internet.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a copy of his
fathers death certificate; contact information for the
crewmembers; a printout entitled the Memoirs of Herbert C.
Bach; a copy of the decedents WD AGO Form 53-98, Military
Record and Report of Separation, issued in conjunction with his
25 Dec 45 discharge, and an inquiry through his Member of
Congress.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The decedent was in the Army Air Corps and served in the Asiatic
Pacific Theatre of Operation from 20 Jun 45 to 25 October 45, as
a pilot. He was awarded the Air Medal (AM) for meritorious
achievement while participating in aerial flights from 10 Jul
29 Jul 45.
The DFC may be awarded to any persons who, after 16 April 1917,
while serving in any capacity with the United States Armed
Forces, distinguish themselves by heroism or extraordinary
achievement while participating in aerial flight. Heroism or
achievement must be entirely distinctive, involving operations
that are not routine. The DFC is not awarded for sustained
operational activities and flights.
________________________________________________________________
THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIDRA recommends denial, stating, in part, the next of
kin (NOK) has not provided a recommendation from someone within
the applicants chain of command who has firsthand knowledge of
the incident, a proposed citation, chain of command endorsement,
or eyewitness statement(s). Furthermore, the NOK cannot
recommend the entire crew for entitlement to the DFC.
Additional crew members will need to submit individual
recommendations in accordance with the 1996 National Defense
Authorization Act (NDAA) rules.
The complete AFPC/DPSIDRA evaluation is at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant on 1 Oct 10 for review and comment within 30 days. As
of this date, no response has been received by this office
(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, including the diary
recalling the events during his fathers missions on 15 July
1945. The acts of heroism and personal sacrifice the deceased
former member endured for our nation is noted; however, based on
our review of the evidence of record and the documentation
submitted in support of the appeal, we do not find it sufficient
to recommend award of the DFC. Therefore, in the absence of
evidence to the contrary, we must recommend denial of the
applicants request.
________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2010-02645 in Executive Session on 7 April 2011, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 29 Jul 10, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIDRA, dated 13 Sep 10.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Oct 10.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02645
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicants military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit B. DPSIDRA has verified the applicants entitlement to the World War II Victory Medal (WWIIVM) and will administratively correct his record to reflect this award. The applicant cannot recommend himself for award of the DFC. _________________________________________________________________ THE...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00244
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00244 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His father be awarded the following awards: Good Conduct Medal (GCM); Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC). A complete copy of the SAFPC evaluation is at Exhibit E. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFHRA admits they missed finding records on four of his fathers missions, one of those missing recorded...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01991
NPRC records do not show he was awarded the Aerial Gunner Badge or the Aircrew Member Badge. However, he was awarded both since he completed training and served in a unit that completed combat missions. The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C. USAF/A3O-AIF recommends approval of the request for the Aircrew Member Badge.
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01543
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01543 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The decedent be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC). _________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: The majority of the panel finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice and recommends...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2009-02773
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS A recommendation for award of the DFC to the applicant was submitted in response to the Air Force Evaluation. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2009-02773 in Executive Session on 7 Dec 10, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02153
STATEMENT OF FACTS: According to the information provided by the Air Force Historical Research Agency (AFHRA), on 6 Aug 45, the pilot was awarded the DSC for his work on the Manhattan Project and his participation in the first atomic bomb mission on 6 Aug 45. By his high degree of skill in directing work with the atomic bomb, and great personal risk in placing the powder charge in the bomb during flight, the former service member distinguished himself, reflecting the highest credit on...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01347
On 8 December 1945, he was relieved from active duty to accept appointment as a first lieutenant, Officers’ Reserve Corps, Army of the United States. DPPPR states that there is no evidence in the decedent’s records of a recommendation for, or award of, the DFC. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the FORMER MEMBER be corrected to show that he was awarded...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-04104
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-04104 INDEX NUMBER: 107.00 XXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her late father’s records be corrected to reflect award of the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC). Although the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) Awards and Decorations Board could not process the...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01541
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force effective 23 July 1962 in the grade of airman basic (E-1). DPSIDRA indicates the applicant has not provided a recommendation from someone within his chain of command who has firsthand knowledge of the incident, proposed citation, chain of command endorsements, or eyewitness statements. The complete DPSIDRA evaluation is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03117
They state, in part, that based upon the criteria used in 1943 there is no basis for any award. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the Congressman McIntyres office, on behalf of the applicant, via electronic mail (email) on 12 Aug 13 for review and comment within 30 days. Although official documents do reference the co-pilot being wounded, there...