RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03959
COUNSEL: NO
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be awarded the Air Medal (AM).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was recommended for the AM for meritorious achievement by the pilot of a B-26 which he repaired shortly before an important combat mission in Korea; however, the AM was never processed and was not entered into his official military record.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a copy of his submission for the AM through a congressional member; a letter and note from the B-26 pilot; his DD Form 214, Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States; and historical information o the 13th Bomb Squadron in Korea.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who served on active duty from 9 January 1952 to 20 December 1955.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial. DPSIDR states the AM is awarded to United States military and civilian personnel for single acts of heroism or meritorious achievements while participating in aerial flight and foreign military personnel in actual combat in support of operations. Required achievement is less than required for the Distinguished Flying Cross, but must be accomplished with distinction above and beyond that expected of professional airmen.
DPSIDR indicates that after a careful review of the applicants service records, they were unable to locate any official documentation, such as a citation or special order, which would verify that the applicant was recommended for, or awarded the AM. There is no specific eyewitness account of the applicants actions involving his repair of the B-26 bomber aircraft, other than what has been provided by the applicant himself. The two documents from the pilot of the aircraft, do not address any details of the incident, and no other eyewitness statements have been provided. The applicant submitted a Congressional Inquiry in October 2005 requesting entitlement to the AM. He was informed of the National Defense Authorization Act rules which guide the submission of requests for entitlement of awards and decorations, including the AM. In addition, he was notified that the documentation which he previously submitted for review was insufficient to justify entitlement to the AM. No additional documentation has been provided by the applicant.
The complete DPSIDR evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 22 December 2011 for review and response within 30 days (Exhibit C). 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 error or injustice. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the applicants contention that he was recommended for the AM for repairing a B-26 before an importance mission, we are not persuaded that his actions meet the criteria for award of the AM. In this respect, we note the AM is awarded for single acts of heroism or meritorious achievement while participating in aerial flight. As such, since the applicants actions were not performed during aerial flight, he does not meet the prerequisite requirement for this decoration. 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-2011-03959 in Executive Session on 8 May 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36 2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-03959 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 22 Oct 11, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSIDR, dated 15 Dec 11.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Dec 12.
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 | CY2011 | BC-2011-01396
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01396 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. Missions flown between 74 and 76, during in peace time do not support award of the AM for sustained operational activities or flights. Additionally, the applicant failed to provide any official evidence to support award of the AM for heroism or...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01728
It was normal to be awarded the DFC after completing 35 combat missions with the 94th Bomb Group (BG). SAFPC Decorations Board disapproved the applicant’s request and requested additional justification in order to reconsider his request. However, the applicant has not provided any new evidence to SAFPC for consideration.
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03598
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03598 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC). In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal statement, and copies of his DFC award documentation package and his DD Form 214, Report of Separation from Active Duty. As he has...
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 | CY2009 | BC-2009-00219
In 1943, General “Hap” Arnold ordered theater commanders not to award the AM or DFC based solely on the number of combat missions completed, but rather for acts of heroism in combat flight or extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight. In this respect, the available evidence of record reflects the applicant completed a total of 35 combat missions while assigned to the Eighth Air Force as a B-17 pilot. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant’s Member of Congress, dated 23 Mar 09, w/atchs.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03420
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03420 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge, be corrected to reflect: 1. The remaining relevant facts, extracted from the applicants military service records, are contained in the evaluation by...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03307
The Air Medal (AM) that was awarded to him on 4 November 2002 by the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) is not the appropriate decoration for his actions. The control cables were severed, and the aircraft could not be landed safely without the cables controlling the flaps. DPPPR states the DFC is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by heroism or extraordinary achievement while participating in flight.