RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:                          DOCKET NUMBER:  98-03028
                       INDEX CODE:  107.00

                       COUNSEL:  NONE

                       HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be awarded the  Distinguished  Flying  Cross  (DFC)  for  missions  flown
during World War II.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

At that period of World War II (WWII),  all  officers  of  Lead  Crews  were
awarded DFCs at the conclusion of  30  missions.   He  flew  30  operational
missions during WWII and should have been awarded the DFC.

In support of his request, applicant submits a copy  of  a  form  indicating
that he flew 30 operational missions  and  additional  documents  associated
with the issues cited in his contentions.  These documents are  appended  at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Information extracted from  applicant’s  submission  indicate  that  he  was
commissioned a second lieutenant in the Army Air Corps on  26  Feb  44,  was
ordered to  extended  active  duty,  and  subsequently  completed  navigator
training.  Effective 18 Dec 44, he  was  promoted  to  the  grade  of  first
lieutenant.  During the period of 7 Oct 44 through 9 Apr 45,  the  applicant
completed 30 operational missions.  On  2  Aug  45,  he  was  relieved  from
active duty due to demobilization in the grade of first lieutenant.

The 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:

The Recognition Programs Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPPR, stated that the  applicant’s
records were destroyed in the National  Personnel  Records  Center  fire  in
1973.  According to the documents furnished by the applicant, he arrived  in
the European Theater of Operations on/about  14  Aug  44;  served  with  the
734th Bomb Squadron; and returned to the Zone of Interior  on/about  18  Apr
45.  He received the Air Medal, with 4 Oak Leaf Clusters, in recognition  of
his aerial achievements.

DPPPR stated there is no indication in the available documentation that  the
applicant was recommended for the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC)  or  that
a written recommendation was submitted into official  channels.   Without  a
copy of the applicant’s  Report  of  Separation,  DPPPR  cannot  verify  the
awards and decorations he was awarded at that time or any other  information
regarding his service.  The applicant  did  not  respond  to  DPPR’s  letter
requesting a copy of his Report of Separation.

Since the documents furnished reflect award of the Air  Medal,  with  4  Oak
Leaf Clusters, DPPPR believes the applicant received sufficient  recognition
for his aerial achievements.  DPPPR cannot verify that  all  30  operational
missions were combat flight missions.  Without any additional  documentation
to support his request, DPPPR cannot verify the applicant’s eligibility  for
the DFC;  therefore,  they  recommend  the  applicant’s  request  be  denied
(Exhibit B).
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and indicated that  he  did  not
respond to DPPPRA’s letter out of sheer disgust.  The information  requested
was either in the file or there was a full and satisfactory explanation  for
its lack.  The complete file was sent through his former congressman,  after
he was required to locate all the appropriate information.  At  his  present
age and condition, he cannot go through all the old  files  again.   He  has
provided another copy  of  the  orders  proving  conclusively  that  he  was
properly separated from the service.

He indicated that ALL of his missions were as part of a LEAD CREW.  At  that
period of the war years, ALL officers who  were  part  of  lead  crews  were
awarded the DFC.  Usually they had flown about half their missions  as  non-
lead crews.   Having  been  trained  both  at  Langley  Field,  VA,  and  at
Alconbury (near Cambridge, UK) in airborne radar, he flew  all  30  missions
as lead crew.

A complete copy of this response is appended at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________

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  probable  error  or  injustice.   We  took  notice   of   the
applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the  case.   We  do
not doubt the  outstanding  contributions  the  applicant  made  during  the
course of his career.  However, no documentary evidence has  been  presented
to indicate that a recommendation for  award  of  the  Distinguished  Flying
Cross (DFC)  was  officially  submitted.   In  the  absence  of  documentary
evidence  substantiating  that  the  applicant  was  recommended   for   the
requested award and that such a recommendation was approved, we do not  find
the evidence provided establishes that the applicant has been the victim  of
an error or injustice.  In view of the above, we agree with the opinion  and
recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility  and  adopt
their rationale as our findings in the case.  Accordingly,  the  applicant’s
request for award of the DFC is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate
the existence of probable 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 1 July 1999, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                  Mr. Terry A. Yonkers, Panel Chair
                  Mr. Joseph A. Roj, Member
                  Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 9 Oct 98, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPR, dated 22 Feb 99.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 8 Mar 99.
   Exhibit D.  Letter from applicant, dated 12 Mar 99, w/atchs.



                                   TERRY A. YONKERS
                                   Panel Chair