RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01488
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His WD AGO Form 53-9, Military Record and Report of Separation,
be corrected to reflect his Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC)
award.
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Block 29 on his Report of Separation should include the DFC
since he flew 87 combat missions in China and Burma from 1944-
1945 while serving in the U.S. Army/Air Corp.
In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his
Report of Separation, a copy of his Certificate of Military
Service, and a copy of a letter from the Army Review Boards
Agency.
His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
_
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant served in the U.S. Army Air Corps during World War
II (WWII).
The DFC criteria: This medal 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 this medal 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 November 11,
1918.
Additional relevant facts pertaining to this application are
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of
the Air Force. Accordingly, there is no need to recite these
facts in this Record of Proceedings.
________________________________________________________________
_
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial. DPSIDR states the applicants
record does not contain any reference to the 87 missions that he
asserts that he flew over enemy territory during WWII.
Additionally, the DFC is awarded for acts of heroism in combat
flight or extraordinary achievement and not for the accumulation
of a specific number of aircraft sorties flown.
The DPSIDR complete evaluation is at Exhibit B.
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant 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. 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 that the applicant has
not been the victim of an error or injustice. 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-2011-01488 in Executive Session on 18 Aug 11, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 31 Mar 11, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSIDR, dated 23 Jun 11.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Jul 11.
Panel Chair
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-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;...
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 | CY2012 | BC-2012-00078
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00078 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. Addressing the applicant’s request to be awarded the AM 1/OLC, the applicant did not provide any documentation that supports this request. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01762
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibits C & G. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial. The DFC may be awarded to any person who, after 6 Apr 17, while serving in any capacity with the US Armed Forces, distinguished themselves by heroism or...
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 | CY2005 | bc-2005-01522
He should be awarded the DFC for his actions on 23 June 1952. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that the AmnM is awarded for voluntary risk of life not involving actual combat and the applicant’s actions on 23 June 1952 were previously recognized in the AM he was awarded for numerous operational flights from 8 May 1953 to 23 June 1952. On 14 June 1952, he was awarded...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 01840
For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicants requests and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit F. On 23 January 2014, the applicant submitted a request for reconsideration which includes evidence the Board previously invited him to provide. The Board advised the applicant that if he submitted additional evidence that other airmen received the DFC for similar or identical missions during the same periods,...
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...