Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02508
Original file (BC-2005-02508.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-02508
                                             INDEX CODE:  107.00
      XXXXXXX                           COUNSEL:  NONE

      XXXXXXX                           HEARING DESIRED:  NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  12 February 2007


________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.    He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) for  completion  of
14 lead crew missions.

2.    He be awarded the Air Medal, with One Silver Oak Leaf Cluster  (AM,  5
OLC), for completion of his last five missions.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He has recently learned that lead crews were awarded the DFC for  completion
of 10 or more missions.  While assigned to the, 755th Bombardment  Squadron,
458th  Bombardment  Group,  Second  Air  Division,  Eighth  Air  Force,   he
completed 14 lead crew missions with Captain Beno as his tail gunner.

He never received his sixth AM for completion of his last five missions.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a copy of the flight records  of
his former aircrew’s flight engineer, a statement  from  the  former  flight
engineer indicating the applicant flew 14 lead crew  missions  with  he  and
Captain Beno as the aircraft’s tail gunner, a  photograph  of  their  former
aircrew, and lead crew commendations.

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is a former member of the Army Air Corps who served on  active
duty from 30 August 1943 through 17 October 1945.  From 7 June  1944  to  22
May 1945, he was assigned to the  754th  and  755th  Bombardment  Squadrons,
458th Bombardment Group, 2nd Air Division,  Eighth  Air  Force,  as  a  B-24
Liberator aerial gunner in the European Theatre of Operation (ETO).   During
this period, he participated in the Normandy,  Northern  France,  Rhineland,
Ardennes-Alsace, and Central Europe campaigns.  He completed a total  of  30
heavy bombardment combat missions and was awarded the AM, with  4  Oak  Leaf
Clusters.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPR recommends the application be denied, and states, in  part,  that
the requirements for award of the DFC and the  AM  changed  dramatically  in
the middle of World War II.  Early  in  1943,  while  visiting  the  various
combat theaters, General “Hap” Arnold expressed his concern with  the  large
number of DFCs being awarded. Under  policy  existing  prior  to  14  August
1943, the DFC and the AM were awarded on the basis of the  number  of  hours
or missions completed.  General Arnold believed that this so  called  “score
card” basis lessened the value of the award and created  a  negative  morale
factor. To correct this situation, it was decided  by  General  Arnold  that
the  “score  card”  basis  be  discontinued.   Further,  applicant  has  not
provided a written recommendation from  someone  in  his  chain  of  command
during the period in question  with  firsthand  knowledge  of  the  acts  or
achievements and the package  was  not  submitted  through  a  congressional
member as required by the Secretary  of  the  Air  Force  Personnel  Council
(SAFPC) in order to consider his request under the provisions of the  Fiscal
Year 1996 National Defense Authorization Act (FY96 NDAA).

The AFPC/DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the evaluation was  forwarded  to  the  applicant  on  14
October 2005, for review and response within 30 days.  However, 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 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  note  of  the  documentation
provided in support of the applicant's request for  award  of  the  DFC  for
completion of 14 lead crew missions and an additional AM for  completion  of
his last five missions.  After thoroughly reviewing the available  personnel
records, we found no evidence to verify he was eligible for, or  recommended
for either award.  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  Docket  Number  BC-2005-02508
in Executive Session on 30 November 2005, under the provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                       Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
                       Ms. Dorothy P. Loeb, Member
                       Ms. Renee M. Collier, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 Aug 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 12 Sep 05.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Oct 05.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03175

    Original file (BC-2005-03175.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-03175 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 21 APR 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His father be awarded the Air Medal (AM) Silver Oak Leaf Cluster (SOLC) and the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) for completing 14 lead crew missions with the 755th Squadron. We took...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00357

    Original file (BC-2005-00357.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00357 INDEX NUMBER: 107.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: ROBERT L. ASTON XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 5 Aug 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) and an additional oak leaf cluster to the Air Medal (AM). ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00543

    Original file (BC-2005-00543.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00543 INDEX NUMBER: 107.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: ROBERT L. ASTON XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 20 Aug 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded two additional oak leaf clusters to the Air Medal (AM). Although applicant has provided documentation indicating he completed 30 combat missions,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02073

    Original file (BC-2005-02073.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    The SAFPC evaluation is at Exhibit F. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Counsel states, among other things, that but for the applicant’s actions on 5 June 1944, the mission’s command pilot would have been in severe shock and unconscious in a matter of minutes and incapable of the aircraft flight maneuvers for which he was later awarded the Medal of Honor. Based on the established 8th Air Force policy of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00358

    Original file (BC-2005-00358.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The AFPC/DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Counsel states that, among other things, that the requested relief should be favorably considered based on the recommendation of the member’s former commander and in view of the established Eighth Air Force policy in effect during the period in question. In this respect, we note the member completed a total of 12 combat missions while...

  • 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 | CY2006 | BC-2006-02052

    Original file (BC-2006-02052.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02052 INDEX NUMBER: 107.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: ROBERT L. ASTON HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded two additional oak leaf cluster to the Distinguished Flying Cross and an additional oak leaf cluster to the Air Medal. 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 | CY2005 | BC-2005-00359

    Original file (BC-2005-00359.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Counsel for applicant states, among other things, in view of the established Eighth Air Force policy in effect during the period in question, the member was due the AM for his completion of five combat missions. Although the member’s records were destroyed by fire in 1973, the Air Force office of primary responsibility has indicated that based on his time in service during World War...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00538

    Original file (BC-2005-00538.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00538 INDEX NUMBER: 107.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: ROBERT L. ASTON XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 20 Aug 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded three additional oak leaf clusters to the Air Medal (AM). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE...