RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-04138
INDEX NUMBER: 107.00
XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC).
_________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Based on the Eighth Air Force established policy of awarding a DFC upon the
completion of 35 combat missions, he is entitled to the award. He
completed 32 combat missions in a B-17 in the European theater, with a
total of 2500 hours and believes he should be entitled to the DFC.
In support of the appeal, the applicant submits a personal statement
through his member of congress; a copy of his WG AGO 53-55, Enlisted Record
and Report of Separation, issued 14 October 1945 and other supporting
documents.
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 in the
European Theatre of Operation from 17 December 1944 to 14 May 1945, as
radio operator and gunner. He completed a total of 33 heavy bombardment
missions and participated in the Rhineland, Central Europe, Northern
France, and Ardennes campaigns.
The DFC was established by Congress on 2 July 1926 and is awarded for
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.
During World War II, the 8th Air Force had an established policy whereby a
DFC was awarded upon the completion of a tour of combat duty. In 1942, the
length of a tour was the completion of 25 combat missions. In 1943,
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. In 1944, the tour length for award of the
DFC was increased to 35 combat missions.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIDR recommends the application be denied, and states, in part, they
are unable to verify the applicant’s entitlement to the requested
decoration. No official documentation was provided or located that
verifies the DFC being awarded to the applicant; or a written
recommendation submitted requesting consideration for the DFC.
The AFPC/DPSIDR evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 27
February 2009 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no
response has been received by this office (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 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 and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that
the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. However,
should the applicant provide additional documentation, we would be willing
to reconsider his petition. In view of the above, we find no 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-2008-04138
in Executive Session on 11 June 2009, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
Ms. Martha J. Evans, Member
Mr. James W. Russell III, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 3 Jun 08, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSIDR, dated 19 Feb 09, w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Feb 09.
MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00219
In 1943, 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. In this respect, the available evidence of record reflects the applicant completed a total of 35 combat missions while assigned to the Eighth Air Force as a B-17 pilot. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant’s Member of Congress, dated 23 Mar 09, w/atchs.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | bc-2004-00787
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 | CY2004 | BC-2004-00386
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-2004-02294
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-2007-00420
_________________________________________________________________ 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 | CY2004 | BC-2004-00916
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00916 INDEX NUMBER: 107.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: ROBERT L. ASTON XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) and Fifth and Sixth Oak Leaf Clusters to the Air Medal (AM, 5 & 6 OLCs). In 2001, the AFBCMR awarded a DFC and additional AMs to an applicant who had...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01247
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 | CY2004 | BC-2004-01874
_________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Based on established Eighth Air Force policy of awarding a DFC upon the completion of 10 lead combat missions, based on his completion of 11 lead combat missions he should be awarded the DFC. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-04104
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-04104 INDEX NUMBER: 107.00 XXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her late father’s records be corrected to reflect award of the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC). Although the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) Awards and Decorations Board could not process the...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00510
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. ...