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).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
This award is long overdue. He should be awarded the DFC for the
extraordinary flying skills and courage displayed on 20 March
1945 when, as co-pilot, he safely ditched a B-17 aircraft into
Kvarner Bay saving the lives of all 10 crewmembers.
In support of his request, the applicant provides letters of
support and Congressional documentation.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
During the time period in question, the applicant was a former
Air Corps member who served on active duty from 27 June 1944
through 8 November 1945, as a co-pilot. He served in the
European Theatre from 9 February 1945 to 17 May 1945. He was
assigned to the 772nd Bomb Squadron, 463rd Bomb Group (Heavy).
In accordance with DoD 1348.33M, AP1.1.2.15 and AFI 36-2803,
Table 2.1, 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.
DPSIDRA was able to verify the applicants entitlement to the
American Campaign Medal (ACM), one Bronze Service Star to his
previously awarded European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal
(EAMECM w/1 BSS) and the World War II Victory Medal (WWIIVM).
AFPC/DPWCM has verified the applicant was a Prisoner of War (POW)
and is entitled to the POW medal. His records will be updated
accordingly.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIDRA recommends denial. DPSIDRA states 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 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.
A recommendation has been provided; however, the recommendation
was not signed nor was a proposed citation provided which are
required in accordance with the 1996 NDAA Rules. In addition,
DPSIDRA was unable to verify the person who wrote the
recommendation as being in the applicants direct chain of
command during the period of 20 March 1945. Although an
eyewitness statement has been provided by a former resident of
Fiume, Italy, it was not officially notarized verifying the
authenticity of the signature and the statement. According to
the unsigned recommendation and eyewitness statement, the B-
17 aircraft was hit with anti-aircraft artillery as it flew at a
low altitude over the city of Fiume causing damage to three of
the four engines. Conflicting documentation concerning the cause
of the downed aircraft has been located within the applicants
official military record. According to official documentation
dated April 1945, it was determined the probable cause of the
downed aircraft was loss of three engines due to pulling
excessive power. About forty miles from the Adriatic coast, the
pilot radioed in and said that they could clear the mountains and
that they were going to try to ditch. A letter to the
applicants family is consistent with the official document dated
5 April 1945; however, according to the applicants WD AGO Form
100, Separation Qualification Record, it states the aircraft was
shot down.
The DPSIDRA complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit
C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 6 August 2010, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was
forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days
(Exhibit D). As of this date, this office has received no
response.
_________________________________________________________________
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 injustice. The
applicants contentions are duly noted; however, after reviewing
the evidence of record the majority of the Board agrees with the
opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary
responsibility and adopts its rationale as the basis for our
conclusion the applicant has not provided evidence showing the
deceased service members entitlement to the DFC. The personal
sacrifice the service member endured for our country is noted;
however, insufficient evidence has been presented to warrant
corrective action. However, other than the administrative
corrections (ACM, EAMECM w/1 BSS, EAMECM w/2BSS, WWIIVM, and the
POW medal) to his records, the majority of the Board finds no
basis to recommend granting the additional relief sought.
_________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD:
The majority of the panel finds insufficient evidence of error or
injustice and recommends the application be denied.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2010-01542 in Executive Session on 26 January 2011,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
By a majority vote, the Board recommended denial of the
application. voted to grant the applicants request and
provided a minority report. The following documentary evidence
pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-01542 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 May 2010, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Record.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIDRA, dated 8 July 2010, w/atch.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 August 2010.
Exhibit E. Minority Report, dated 15 March 2011, w/atch.
Panel Chair
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-2010-01767
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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | CY2011 | BC-2011-00025
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 25 Mar 11, 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 C). _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2011-00025 in Executive Session on 9 Jun 11, under the provisions of AFI...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01785
Air Medal (AM). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial of the applicants request for the AM, PUC, and PH Medal, indicating there is no evidence of his entitlement to these awards. A thorough review of the applicants record revealed no...
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-2010-01403
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: