RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03186
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be entitled to the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) for
events that occurred during World War II (WWII).
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
In WWII he endangered his own life by coming to the aid of a
wounded tail gunner. On 19 Jan 2008, the Institute of Military
Honors detailed why he received the DFC.
In support of his request, the applicant provides a personal
statement and a copy of a Certificate of Recognition.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The DFC may be awarded to any person who, after 6 Apr 1917,
while serving in any capacity with the United States Armed
Forces, distinguishes themselves by heroism or extraordinary
achievement while participating in aerial flight. The
performance of the act of heroism must be evidenced by voluntary
action above and beyond the call of duty. The extraordinary
achievement must have resulted in an accomplishment so
exceptional and outstanding as to clearly set the individual
apart from comrades or from other persons in similar
circumstances. In WWII, the DFC was also awarded in recognition
of sustained operational activities against an armed enemy.
________________________________________________________________
THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSID recommends denial. DPSID states that after a
thorough review of the applicant's official military personnel
record, they were unable to verify award of the DFC. The
Institute of Military Honors Certificate of Recognition provided
by the applicant is not an official document. Accordingly, he
has not provided a proposed citation, inclusive period of the
act/achievement, or a recommendation from someone who has
firsthand knowledge of the applicant's act/achievement. The
applicant has not exhausted all avenues of administrative relief
nor has the submission of the request been received in a timely
manner. Nonetheless, should the Board determine that the
applicant has exhausted all avenues of administrative relief,
DPSID recommends denial based on the lack of official
documentation in the applicants military personnel record. To
grant the applicant relief would be contrary to the eligibility
criteria established by the War Department, the Department of
Defense and/or the Secretary of the Air Force.
Notwithstanding the above, DPSID determined the applicants
entitlement to the American Campaign Medal and the WWII Victory
Medal. Upon final Board decision, administrative correction of
his official military personnel record will be completed by
AFPC/DPSOR.
The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AFHRA/RSA recommends denial. RSA states that after a thorough
review of the applicants official military personnel record and
extensive unit history research they cannot verify the
applicants recollection of the events that occurred during
WWII. History does confirm that on 21 Nov 1944, the tail gunner
from the applicants crew received the Purple Heart for injuries
he sustained on that day in question. However, RSA could not
find any mention that the applicant or anyone else came to the
tail gunners aid. After 60 years, RSA cannot second guess his
commander's decision not to recommend the applicant for the DFC
as allegedly promised by the squadron adjutant at the time of
the event.
The complete RSA evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 8 Nov 2013, copies of the Air Force evaluations were
forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within
30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this
office (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 applicants complete submission in judging the merits of
the case; however, we agree with the opinions and
recommendations of the Air Force offices 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. Therefore, aside from the administrative
corrections to his record, 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 this application
in Executive Session on 3 Apr 2014, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-
2013-03186:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 29 Jun 2013, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 16 Sep 2013.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFHRA/RSA, dated 23 Oct 2013, w/atchs.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Nov 2013.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05128
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05128 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits C, D and E. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial indicating...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05531
________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial, noting that the applicant has not exhausted all avenues of administrative relief. The complete SAF/PC evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In a rebuttal response, a friend of the applicant submitted additional documents including, copies of 339th Bomb Squadron's Record...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03723
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility which are included at Exhibits C and D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of the Distinguished Flying Cross and the Purple Heart medal. After a thorough review of the applicant's official military personnel record, no documentation was found to verify award of the Purple Heart Medal. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01885
He completed 25 bomber missions with distinction and met the criteria for award of the DFC based on the Air Force Historical Research Agency (AFHRA) document, Distinguished Flying Cross and Air Medal Criteria in the Army Air Forces in World War II. On his 29th mission, the aircraft he was in crashed and his back was broken. The applicant has not provided justification or supporting documentation that reflects he was eligible for award of the DFC nor did the applicant provide evidence of...
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 | CY2014 | BC 2014 01090
Under the new policy an individual was considered for award of the AM after completing 250 operational hours and for the DFC after 500 hours. No documentation was submitted indicating the applicant completed 500 operational flying hours. A complete copy of the SAF/MRBP evaluation is at Exhibit E. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Through a letter from his son, he contends that based upon the AFHRA/RS description of the requirements for award of flying decorations in WWII, the Air...
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00809
Other than the reference to the DFC in his units awards and decorations officers 14 Feb 69 letter, there is no official military documentation recommending or awarding the DFC to the applicant. Notwithstanding the above, AFPC/DPSIDs research did reveal the AM w/3BOLC, VCM, Vietnam Service Medal with four Bronze Service Stars (VSM w/4 BSS), and Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm (RVNGC w/P), should have been awarded during the applicants service from 26 Feb 65 to 12 Nov 68 but...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04289
Fourth, any criteria set by the War Department are just not applicable to this case. The OER is clearly an official record, and it clearly states that the decedent had been recommended for a DFC. This case is not like others where the applicant seeks the award of a DFC where the only evidence was the applicant's statement that he was told by his commander that he would be recommended for a DFC.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01521
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01521 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) awarded for his actions on 1-2 May 99 be changed from being awarded for extraordinary achievement to being awarded for extraordinary heroism with award of the valor (V) device. There is no documentation in the records to support his characterization of this deployed...