RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-02336

						COUNSEL:  NONE
	   (DECEASED)

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO
        (APPLICANT) 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her deceased father’s records be corrected to reflect he was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross First Oak Leaf Cluster (DFC w/1OLC).  

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The decedent records were lost in a typhoon.  He did not receive the DFC w/1OLC which was awarded to nine other members of his crew.  He flew as pilot of the 90th Bombardment Group and 321st Bombardment Squadron for a total of 38 combat missions, accumulating 365 hours of combat flying.  This information can be verified by a bombardier, in which his telephone number is provided.  

The decedent demonstrated extreme valor.  He seldom talked about his experiences and would not have pursued this award himself.  As such, his widow and four children would find it meaningful and just for his records to be corrected.  

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 16 December 1966, the decedent retired from the Air Force and was credited with 24 years, 6 months, and 21 days of total active service.  

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C.  

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSID recommends denial.  There is no evidence in the decedent’s record, nor did the next of kin present any, to support award of the DFC w/1BOLC.  Moreover, the request was not filed in a timely manner.  

The Distinguished Flying Cross may be awarded to any persons who, after 6 April 1917, while serving in any capacity with the United States Armed Forces, distinguish 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.  Awards will be made only to recognize single acts of heroism or extraordinary achievement and will not be made in recognition of sustained operational activities against an armed enemy.  

Effective 14 August 1943, based on a revised policy for award of the DFC, an act of heroism must be evidenced by voluntary action in the face of great danger above and beyond the line of duty while participating in aerial flight.  As for extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight, the results accomplished must be so exceptional and outstanding as to clearly set a member apart from his comrades who have not been so recognized.  

The basis for the next of kin’s request is not for a specific act of heroism or extraordinary achievement, but based on a number of missions flown.  Nonetheless, should the merits of the case be considered and the lack of timeliness of the submission be overlooked, in order to reasonably consider the request, the next of kin will need to submit a recommendation from someone with firsthand knowledge of the act/achievement preferably from someone within the applicant’s chain of command at the time of the act/achievement, a proposed citation with inclusive dates and a summary of his single act of heroism or extraordinary achievement, and eyewitness statements.  

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C.

SAF/MRBP recommends denial.  During the period of service provided by the applicant, on or about September to October of 1945, the policy for award of the DFC was based on extraordinary achievements setting a member apart from his peers to justify receipt of the decoration.  The DFC cannot be awarded based solely on number of missions, sorties, or hours flown.   

A complete copy of the SAF/MRBP evaluation is at Exhibit D.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force and SAF/MRBP evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 12 September 2016 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E).  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 timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an 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 (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief.  

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-2015-02336 in Executive Session on 13 October 2016 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-02336 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 June 2015, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSID, dated 6 October 2015.  
	Exhibit D.  Memorandum, SAF/MRBP, dated 8 September 2016.  
	Exhibit E.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 12 September 2016.  

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), it is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.