RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-03723
INDEX CODE: 107.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
This application for correction of the records of O--- G--- was submitted
by his brother (I--- G. G---).
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The former member’s Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) be upgraded to the Air
Force Cross or the Medal of Honor.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His brother saved the life of a fellow crewmember while putting his own
life in danger. His actions showed “individual gallantry at the risk of
life above and beyond the call of duty.” He believes his brother met the
requirements of the Medal of Honor.
In support of his request, applicant submits a personal statement, copies
of the former member’s DFC citation, a newspaper article and additional
documents associated with the issues cited in his contentions. The
applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) indicated that the former
member’s military personnel records were unavailable.
Information extracted from applicant’s submission reveals the former member
was awarded the DFC by Special Order 128, dated 30 June 1943, for
extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight in the
European and North African Theaters of Operation as a ball-turret gunner on
a B-17 type aircraft.
_________________________________________________________________
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. It should be noted that this Board does
not have the authority to award the applicant the Medal of Honor. We can,
however, if the evidence warrants, make a recommendation to the approving
authority that a member be considered for the Medal of Honor.
Notwithstanding this fact, after reviewing the applicant’s submission, we
do not find the evidence sufficient to warrant the approval of the
requested relief. We are not convinced by the available evidence that the
former member was not appropriately recognized for his extraordinary
achievement. There is nothing in the information provided which shows to
our satisfaction any irregularity in the commanding general’s decision to
award the DFC rather than a more prestigious decoration. It appears the
authorities at the time determined the DFC was the more appropriate award
for the former member’s extraordinary achievement and we find no basis upon
which to disagree with that determination. In view of the above and absent
persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to
recommend granting the relief sought in this application. The Board
acknowledges the personal sacrifice the applicant’s brother made in
defending our country and hopes he and his family take pride in his courage
and contributions during a perilous period in history.
4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown
that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to
our understanding of the issue(s) involved. Therefore, the request for a
hearing is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________
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 1 February 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Roscoe Hinton Jr., Panel Chair
Mr. Garry G. Sauner, Member
Mr. Joseph D. Yount, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR
Docket Number BC-2004-03723.
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 Nov 04, w/atchs.
ROSCOE HINTON JR.
Panel Chair
_____________________________
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03794
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-2004-01538
Therefore, the following information has been extracted from the documentation provided by applicant. Regardless, although the Eighth Air Force had an established policy from 1942 to 1944, whereby a DFC was awarded upon the completion of 25 heavy bomber missions, in 1944, the total number of missions for award of a DFC was increased from 25 to 35. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2004-01538 in...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02072
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that the applicant has not provided any documentation showing he was recommended for the DFC. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03914
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He has just recently discovered an attachment to his Airman’s Medal, special order GB----, dated 2 Sep 94, which was completed two days after said order, which states, “The Secretary of the Air Force has considered this individual for an additional 10 percent retirement pay in connection with the act of heroism that warranted this decoration. Review by the Secretary of the Air Force determined that...
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 | CY2005 | BC-2005-02255
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02255 INDEX NUMBER: 107.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: ROBERT L. ASTON XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 22 Jan 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded two Distinguished Flying Crosses (DFCs), an additional oak leaf cluster to the Air Medal (AM), and the Army Commendation Medal (ACM). In this...
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.
In support of the appeal, applicant submits a copy of his WD AGO Form 53-55 and a Letter of Recommendation, dated 29 May 1944, indicating that he completed a total of 25 combat missions and was awarded the DFC and AM, 3 OLC. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states that at the time he completed a total of 25 combat missions a member would be awarded a DFC and upon completion of every five combat...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01099A
In a letter, dated 25 August 2002, the applicant requested reconsideration of his request for award of the DFC and provided additional evidence (Exhibit F). In view of this, and since the applicant did complete 25 combat missions, we recommend his records be corrected to the extent indicated below. RICHARD A. PETERSON Panel Chair AFBCMR 02-01099 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2001-02836
If one member of a crew receives the DFC all members should. The AFPC/DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant states that in 1944 he and others were selected to be lead crew and would receive the DFC upon completion of 30 missions. He states that AFPC has erred in their recommendation and that he should be granted the medal as well as the recognition of a certificate.