RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01541
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Air Medal (AM) be upgraded to the Distinguished Flying Cross
(DFC). In addition, all the enlisted members aboard his aircraft
who received the AM, should have their awards upgraded to the DFC
also.
_______________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The officers aboard his aircraft were awarded the DFC; however,
the enlisted members received award of the AM.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal
statement; a copy of his DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United
States Report of Transfer or Discharge; and copies of
congressional correspondence.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force effective 23 July
1962 in the grade of airman basic (E-1). He was progressively
promoted to the grade of airman first class (E-4) with a date of
rank of 1 June 1966. He was honorably discharged from active
duty effective 22 July 1966. He served 4 years on active duty
with one year, 5 months, and 27 days of Foreign Service. His
separation document shows he was awarded the Air Medal for the
period 9 April 1965 through 8 July 1965.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIDRA recommends denial. DPSIDRA states that according to
the governing directive, the DFC may be awarded to any persons
who, after 6 April 1967, while serving in any capacity with the
United States Armed Forces, distinguished themselves by heroism
or extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial
flight. Under the Fiscal Year 1996 National Defense
Authorization Act (NDAA), Section 526, which was enacted into law
on 10 February 1996, the original or reconstructed written award
recommendation, is required for the recommended individual. The
recommendation must be made by someone, other than the member
himself, preferably the commander or supervisor at the time of
the act of achievement, with firsthand knowledge of the members
accomplishments. If someone has firsthand knowledge of the
applicants accomplishments and achievements, he may act as the
recommending official. The recommendation must include the name
of the decoration (i.e., DFC) reason for the recognition
(heroism, achievement, or meritorious service), inclusive dates
of the act, and a narrative description of the act. The
recommending official must sign the recommendation. Also a
proposed citation is required and any chain of command
endorsements are encouraged. Any statements from fellow
comrades, eyewitness statements attesting to the act, sworn
affidavits, and other documentation substantiating the
recommendation should be included with the package.
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. Furthermore, he cannot
recommend himself or the entire enlisted crew for upgrade to the
DFC. Additional crew members will need to submit individual
recommendations in accordance with the 1996 NDAA rules.
The complete DPSIDRA evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant responded that firsthand knowledge of something
that happened 45 years ago is hearsay. If the Air Force records
cannot be found to document these happenings, then if he was the
top Air Force officer, he wouldnt even think about it. He
guessed this was a shot in the dark that justice would be done.
He does not know if the scuttlebutt about the DFCs was true. He
truly does want this oversight corrected, but only if all of the
enlisted members who flew those missions are rewarded.
The applicants complete rebuttal 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 an error or an 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 the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. The
personal sacrifice the applicant endured for our country is
noted; however, insufficient evidence has been presented to
warrant award of the DFC. 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 AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2010-01541 in Executive Session on 19 January 2011,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in connection
with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-01541:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 May 2010, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIDRA, dated 23 Jun 10.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Jul 10.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 16 Aug 10.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01767
The available records provided by the applicant indicate the following. The recommendation must include the name of the decoration (i.e. DFC), reason for recognition (heroism, achievement, or meritorious service), inclusive dates of the act, and a narrative description of the act. In accordance with the 1996 NDAA Rules, a recommendation made by someone with firsthand knowledge within the applicants chain of command, certified eyewitness statement(s), and a proposed citation have not been...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01403
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01403 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: It appears the applicant is requesting that her late husbands records be corrected to reflect award of: 1. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSIDRA recommends denial...
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 | CY2010 | BC-2010-03392
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03392 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC). The complete DPSIDRA evaluation is at Exhibit B. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-03392...
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 | CY2010 | BC 2010 02645
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 aircraft during this 17 hour mission, on 15 Jul 45, was piloted by both the commander and his...
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 | CY2010 | BC-2010-01542
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01542 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He 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 the...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03620
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal statement and copies of a witness statement; discharge document; pictures of his aircraft and crew; list of missions; letters to congressional members; and articles of two other service members who received medals for similar actions. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In response to the Air Force advisory opinion, the applicant submits statements from two...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00730
In support of her request, the applicant provides copies of documents extracted from his military personnel record, a copy of his death certificate, a copy of the “Distinguished Flying Cross and Air Medal Criteria in the Army Air Forces in World War II” by Barry L. Spink, Archivist, Air Force Historical Research Agency, and other supporting documents. SAFPC states although the criteria for award of the Air Medal (AM) and Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) changed numerous times during the...