Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03804
Original file (BC-2002-03804.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2002-03804
            INDEX CODE:  107.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE


            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The wife of the former member requests his  records  be  corrected  to
show he was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) Medal.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The wife of the former member contends that he felt that  he  deserved
the DFC for his duty on Shemya Island during World War II (WWII).

In  support  of  the  appeal,  applicant  submits  a  copy  of   three
certificates, a copy of General Orders, a  copy  of  military/civilian
education, a copy of his Army Separation Qualification Record, a  copy
of the Air Medal Citation, a copy of the 28th Composite Group Lineage,
and a copy of a newspaper article.

Applicant's complete submission,  with  attachments,  is  attached  at
Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The former member’s master personnel record (MPR) appears to have been
destroyed by the 1973 fire at the National  Personnel  Records  Center
(NPRC) in St. Louis.  The only  documents  pertaining  to  the  former
member’s military service are those provided by  the  applicant.   The
former member served on Active Duty during the  period  26  July  1942
through 28 May 1946, and his highest grade was  captain.   During  his
first four months, he served as a pilot  of  a  four-engine  aircraft.
The next 32 months were served as an Operations Officer in  the  404th
Bombardment Squadron in the Aleutians.   His  last  five  months  were
spent as a Public Relations Officer.  A news article stated  that  the
former member participated in combat aerial missions while serving  as
an Operations Officer in the Aleutians.  He received the Air Medal for
the period 15 August 1944 through 3 February 1945 for participating in
numerous  strikes  against  Japanese  installations  in  the  Northern
Kuriles.

From the documents provided by the applicant, they verified  that  the
former member is entitled to the Air Medal,  Asiatic-Pacific  Campaign
Medal  with  1  Bronze  Service  Star,  Distinguished  Unit  Citation,
American Campaign Medal, and WWII Victory Medal.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPR states that the applicant has submitted her  request  based
on statements by the  former  member  that  he  felt  he  should  have
received the Distinguished Flying Cross.  The applicant cannot at this
time  provide  any  documentation  showing  the  former   member   was
recommended for this decoration.  She believes a  footlocker  lost  in
shipment in July 1945 might contain  documentation  pertinent  to  her
request.  However, the former member served in the  404th  Bombardment
Squadron during the period 5 August  1943  through  5  February  1946.
Therefore, the footlocker would most likely not contain any  documents
pertaining  to  the  former  member’s  military  service  after  1945.
Therefore, they recommend denial of applicant’s request.

A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments,  is  attached  at
Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The wife of the former member states that she has not based this claim
solely on opinions, as she has reviewed some letters  received  during
the time of his Missions from the Island of Shema, Alaska, to bomb the
enemy targets (Japan), and also of information given  to  her  by  his
military associates with whom she is in contact.

She states that she has filed this claim based on several reasons, his
descriptions orally and in writing of his missions,  information  from
his military associates, and some historical records of those missions
in  publications.   Without  finding  official  orders  for  his   DFC
recommendation, she is unable to provide the required  evidence.   She
appreciates the assistance of  each  department  that  processed  this
application and inquiry.  The records she is seeking would be for  his
duty as a pilot on the Island of Shemya, Alaska, 1944-45.  She is  not
concerned with his additional duty 1945-46 to Enid, Oklahoma.  It  was
her understanding that the applicant (former  member)  had  more  than
three missions of combat flight.  This does not infer a dispute of  HQ
AFPC/DPPPR records as stated.

She received  the  request  cited  in  the  aforementioned  letter  to
withdraw this application.  She states it is with reluctance that  she
does so,  but  does  not  wish  to  place  a  further  burden  on  the
government, the Air Force and others regarding this case.

Applicant's complete response is attached at 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  complete
submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we  agree  with
the opinion and recommendation  of  the  Air  Force  and  adopt  their
rationale as the basis for the conclusion that the former  member  was
not been the victim of an error or injustice.  It  has  been  verified
that the former member was  awarded  the  Air  Medal  for  meritorious
achievement in aerial flights for the  period  15  August  1944  to  3
February 1945.  Documentation shows he did, however, accomplish  three
combat flight missions, for which he was awarded the Air  Medals.   As
stated, the Distinguished Flying Cross is awarded to  service  members
who distinguish themselves by  heroism  or  extraordinary  achievement
while participating in aerial flight.  There is no evidence  that  the
former member was recommended  for  the  award  of  the  Distinguished
Flying Cross.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the  contrary,
we find no compelling 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,  BC-
2002-03804 in Executive Session on 11 June 2003, under the  provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

                       Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
                       Mr. John B. Hennessey, Member
                       Ms. Barbara J. White-Olson, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:


      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 Jan 01, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 15 Apr 03.
      Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 25 Apr 03.
      Exhibit E.  Applicant’s Response, dated 19 May 03.




                             MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
                             Panel Chair


Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00386

    Original file (BC-2004-00386.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    AFPC/DPPPR states, in part, that although the applicant’s records indicate that he completed a total of 35 combat missions and he has submitted a DFC recommendation signed by his former commander, in 1946, 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. Applicant’s records do not indicate he was...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | bc-2004-00787

    Original file (bc-2004-00787.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Under the revised policy, the DFC could be awarded for acts of heroism in combat flight or extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight (Exhibit C). _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Counsel for applicant states, among other things, that the requested relief should be favorably considered based on the recommendation of the applicant’s former commanding officer and in view of the established...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03794

    Original file (BC-2004-03794.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    In BC-2004-02294, the AFBCMR awarded a DFC to an applicant who had also completed more than the required ten missions as a lead navigator and an additional oak leaf cluster for completion of a tour of 32 combat missions. AFPC/DPPPR states, in part, that although the applicant’s records indicate that he completed a total of 35 combat missions and he has submitted a DFC recommendation signed by his former commander, in 1946, General “Hap” Arnold ordered theater commanders not to award the AM...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | bc-2004-02294

    Original file (bc-2004-02294.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    During the period in question, he was told by a major at base headquarters that upon returning stateside, he would receive the DFC for his completion of a tour of 32 combat missions and an oak leaf cluster to the DFC for his completion of 14 lead missions. Under the revised policy, the DFC could be awarded for acts of heroism in combat flight or extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight. In view of this statement, and given the total number of missions the applicant...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01548

    Original file (BC-2007-01548.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01548 INDEX NUMBER: 107.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: ROBERT L. ASTON HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 13 November 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded two oak leaf clusters to the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) and three additional oak leaf clusters to the Air Medal (AM). In view of the above,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01247

    Original file (BC-2006-01247.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01247 INDEX CODE: 107.00 XXXXXX (DECEASED) COUNSEL: DR ASTON HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 27 OCT 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her deceased husband’s records be corrected to show he was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) and awarded the Air Medal (AM) with five Oak Leaf Clusters...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00420

    Original file (BC-2007-00420.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: In view of his completion of a total of 37 combat missions and based on the Eighth Air Force established policy of awarding an AM upon the completion of every five heavy bomber missions and awarding a DFC upon the completion of 35 combat missions, he should be awarded the DFC and an additional AM. In view of the above, and since the applicant never received a DFC for his completion of a combat...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02179

    Original file (BC-2005-02179.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02179 INDEX NUMBER: 107.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: ROBERT L. ASTON XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 12 Jan 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) and two additional oak leaf clusters to the Air Medal (AM). In addition, based on the Eighth Air Force policy...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00453

    Original file (BC-2007-00453.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00453 INDEX NUMBER: 107.00 XXXXXXXX COUNSEL: ROBERT L. ASTON HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 12 August 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross, First Oak Leaf Cluster (DFC, 1 OLC) and the Air Medal, Fifth Oak Leaf Cluster (AM, 5 OLC). The DFC was established...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00510

    Original file (BC-2007-00510.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    He was never awarded an additional AM for his 26th through 30th combat missions In support of the appeal, applicant submits a statement from the former 67th Deputy Squadron Navigator recommending him for award of the DFC and an additional oak leaf cluster to the AM, and a list of his combat missions. The DFC was established by Congress on 2 July 1926 and is awarded for heroism or extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight. ...