RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03602
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be entitled to award of the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC)
for his actions of 10 May 1944.
________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He should have been awarded the DFC for actions performed prior
to being shot down on 10 May 1944. He was injured, hospitalized
and taken to a Prisoner of War (POW) camp. After escaping from
the POW camp, he eventually made it back to friendly lines; was
returned to the United States and discharged. He was aware of
the submission for the award after he had three confirmed kills;
before his B-17 aircraft was shot down. However, he believes
that after being shot down, eyewitness accounts provided
sufficient evidence that they were killed in action (KIA) and
all of the non-essential records at the base were destroyed, and
no further action was taken on the submission for award of the
DFC.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a copy of his
WD AGO Form 53-55, Enlisted Record and Report of Separation,
issued in conjunction with his 27 Oct 45 discharge; a copy of
his honorable discharge certificate; a copy of his Missing Air
Crew Report (MACR); letters of support, and other supporting
documents.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant entered active duty, on 15 Mar 43, in the Army Air
Force and had continuous service until his 27 Oct 45 discharge.
He was progressively promoted to the grade of staff sergeant
(SSgt) and was credited with one year, three months, and eight
days of continental service, and one year, four months, and five
days of foreign service.
________________________________________________________________
THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial, stating, in part, after a
thorough review of the applicants military personnel record,
they were unable to locate a special order or any other
documentation verifying the applicants award of the DFC.
The DFC, authorized by an Act of Congress on 2 July 1926,
amended by Executive Order 7786 on 8 January 1938, is awarded to
any officer or enlisted person of the Armed Forces of the United
States who shall have distinguished her/himself in actual combat
in support of operations by heroism or extraordinary achievement
while participating in an aerial flight, subsequent to
11 November 1918.
The complete AFPC/DPSIDR evaluation is at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant reiterated his original contention and believes he
has submitted enough evidence to substantiate his claim. He
notes being the recipient of the Purple Heart (PH) Medal and the
POW recognition medal, through previous board actions.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal
statement; an account of his actions on 10 May 44; a copy of
newspaper articles and other supporting documents.
The applicants complete response, with attachments, 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 error or 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
their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. The
acts of heroism and personal sacrifice the applicant 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, we find no basis to recommend granting the
relief sought in this application.
________________________________________________________________
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-2010-03602 in Executive Session on 14 July 2011, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 16 Aug 10, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIDR, dated 13 Dec 10.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Jan 11.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 19 Jan 11, w/atchs.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03684
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: AFPC/DPWCM recommends the applicant’s request for award of the POW Medal be denied. On 22 October 1944, he provided the information that immediately after being shot down, he was picked up by partisans, evading capture by the enemy. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the applicant’s contentions, we are not persuaded he should be awarded the PH, DFC, and POW Medal.
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01378
___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant responded by providing copies of his Individual Flight Record (IFR) that reflects 33 versus 29 missions. We find no evidence the applicant was ever recommended for award of the DFC. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-01378 in Executive Session on 19 Jan 11,...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-01041
________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial and states, in part, that although it appears the applicant may have a credible claim, without any verifiable documentation within his military records to indicate that he was formally recommended, or awarded the DFC for the events that occurred on 13 November 1952, they must recommend disapproval based on the guidelines of Section 526 of the Fiscal Year 1996 National Defense...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02730
_________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He should be awarded the PH because he was hit by shrapnel from enemy fire and should be awarded the DFC because he completed over 25 combat missions. The applicant also states that during the period in question, the 8th Air Force had an established policy whereby the DFC was awarded upon the completion of 25 combat missions. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00355
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR states that the applicant has not provided any documentation showing he was recommended for, or awarded, the DFC. A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachment, is attached at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPPWB states that a review of the applicant’s record indicates he was a POW from 13 April 1944 to 3 May 1945, approximately 13 months. A complete copy of their evaluation is attached at Exhibit...
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...
Therefore, we recommend his records be corrected to the extent indicated below. A complete copy of the Air Staff evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR STAFF EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Staff evaluation and states that the reason in the delay in the decoration recommendation is that none of his crew were debriefed after they were repatriated from German POW c no one had any knowledge of decorations. The following members of the Board considered this...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00994
After a complete review of all three official military records they were able to confirm the two crewmembers received the DFC for a number of bombardment missions flown over Europe in June 1944, and the applicant receiving the Air Medal w/3 OLC in June 1944. He requested the DFC through his congressman’s office in June 1996 and was informed a written recommendation was required for award of the DFC. The Board also notes, the applicant received the Air Medal w/3 OLC during the time both...
There is no indication in his records, and he did not provide any documentation, showing he was recommended for the DFC or an oak leaf cluster to his AM. The operative word in [the former group commander’s] statement that the Chief apparently overlooked is “Before” [emphasis applicant’s]. Therefore, the criteria for that command was not completion of a specified number of missions (35) before being recommended for the DFC and completing a tour.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00700
In this respect, we note that counsel has failed to provide evidence that the member was ever recommended for a BSM. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 29 May 1944, he was awarded the Air Medal, First Oak Leaf Cluster, for extraordinary achievement, while serving as a Navigator on B-17 airplanes on many bombardment...