RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04339 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His record be corrected to reflect he was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC). ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He should be awarded the DFC as a Lead Navigator after completing 31 combat missions in a B-17 aircraft between June 1944 and February 1945. He had some problems with his squadron commander. He felt the commander was bigoted towards him and would not recommend him for this award. At the time, he was only 20 years old and did not know how to handle the situation. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member of the Air Force. He began serving as a navigator in April 1944. During this period of service, he was awarded the Air Medal with 4 Oak Leaf Clusters and a Purple Heart. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial. The Distinguished Flying Cross is awarded to any officer or enlisted person of the armed forces of the United States who distinguished themselves in actual combat in support of operations by heroism or extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight subsequent to 11 November 1918. After a thorough review of the applicant’s record, his entitlement to the DFC could not be verified. Retroactive recommendations for awards for retirees/veterans beyond the 2 year time limitation may be submitted in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 1130. The law allows for the submission of award recommendations without regard to any previously imposed time constraints, if referred by a Member of Congress. Under the provisions of this law, requests must be referred to the Secretary of the Air Force by a Member of Congress through the Secretary of the Air Force Liaison Office. The burden and costs for researching and assembling documentation to support award recommendations rest with the requester. In order for a request to be reasonably considered under the provisions of law, the member must submit a reconstructed recommendation of the award, a narrative citation of the action, eyewitness attesting to the acts of valor or service performed sworn affidavits, a signed recommendation and a list of potential sources of information to assists in creating a package for future consideration. Should the Board determine the applicant has exhausted all avenues of administrative relief; the applicant has not provided official documentation verifying he was recommended for and awarded the DFC. He also does not provide justification or supporting documentation that reflects he is eligible for award of the DFC nor does he provide evidence of an error or injustice. The complete DPSID evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 8 February 2013, 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. We took notice of the available evidence of record and the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, his records do not reflect he is entitled to, or was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross. While the applicant has a commendable record of service, regrettably, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to grant 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 BCMR Docket Number BC-2012-04339 in Executive Session on 25 April 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Sept 12, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 14 Jan 13, w/atchs. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Feb 13.