Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03620 ADDENDUM
Original file (BC-2010-03620 ADDENDUM.txt) Auto-classification: Approved
ADDENDUM TO 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: BC-2010-03620 

COUNSEL: 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) for his act of 
valor and completion of 50 total combat missions while serving as 
a turret gunner and aerial engineer aboard a B-17 bomber during 
World War II. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

RESUME OF CASE: 

 

On 28 June 2011, the Board considered and denied the applicant’s 
request to award him the DFC or other appropriate decoration. 
For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the 
applicant’s separation; and, the rationale of the earlier 
decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings (ROP) at 
Exhibit E. 

 

On 19 January 2012, the applicant submitted a request for 
reconsideration for award of the DFC. 

 

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal 
statement, a statement from an eyewitness, statements from two 
officers in his chain of command, an excerpt of DFC and Air Medal 
criteria in the Army Air Forces in World War II, and an excerpt 
of information on the AN-M64 500 pound General Purpose Bomb. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit F. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 

 

Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate 
the existence of an error or an injustice. After thoroughly 
reviewing the evidence of record and the additional documentation 
submitted by the applicant, we find that he has met his burden of 
established his entitlement to the requested DFCs. In this 
respect, we note that after reviewing the criteria for award of 
the DFC and noting the statements from an eyewitness and two 
officers in his former chain-of-command, we are convinced that 


his actions on 11 June 1943, rose to a level to warrant award of 
the DFC for extraordinary achievement. On that date, while 
enroute to the primary impact bombing target, he dislodged a 
fully-armed, fused 500 pound bomb that had fallen upon the bomb 
bay doors. With total disregard for his own safety and despite 
not wearing a parachute, he climbed from his position in the top 
turret, straddled the bomb bay doors at an altitude of 25 
thousand feet and while simply holding only a safety strap with 
one hand, he grabbed the impeller of the bomb with the other in 
order to stop its rotation and deterred any chance of its 
detonation in the aircraft, allowing the bomb to safely drop when 
the pilot opened the bomb bay doors. Furthermore, in view of the 
policy of the applicant’s numbered Air Force command at the time, 
i.e., Twelfth Air Force, to award a DFC upon the completion of 
every 25 bombardment missions and noting his completion of 54 
bombardment missions, some of which he has already received 
recognition with six Air Medals, we also find a sufficient basis 
to award him the First Oak Cluster to the DFC. In view of the 
above, we recommend his records be corrected to the extent 
indicated below. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: 

 

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force 
relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that: 

 

 a. On 12 June 1943, he was awarded the Distinguished Flying 
Cross for extraordinary achievement for his actions on 11 June 
1943. 

 

 b. On 21 October 1943, he was awarded the Distinguished 
Flying Cross, First Oak Leaf Cluster, for sustained aerial flight 
on many bombardment missions over enemy occupied Europe. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

The following members of the Board considered this application in 
Executive Session on 16 October 2012, under the provisions of AFI 
36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 


All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The 
following documentary evidence for AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-
03620 was considered: 

 

 

Exhibit E. Record of Proceedings, dated 21 Jul 11, 

 with Exhibits A through D. 

Exhibit F. Applicant’s Letter, dated 19 Jan 12, with atchs. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 



Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY2010 | BC-2010-03620

    Original file (BC-2010-03620.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal statement and copies of a witness statement; discharge document; pictures of his aircraft and crew; list of missions; letters to congressional members; and articles of two other service members who received medals for similar actions. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In response to the Air Force advisory opinion, the applicant submits statements from two...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9200109

    Original file (9200109.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Therefore, we recommend his records be corrected to the extent indicated below. A complete copy of the Air Staff evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR STAFF EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Staff evaluation and states that the reason in the delay in the decoration recommendation is that none of his crew were debriefed after they were repatriated from German POW c no one had any knowledge of decorations. The following members of the Board considered this...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 05942

    Original file (BC 2012 05942.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which are attached at Exhibit C and F. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: SAF/MRBP recommends denial noting the applicant did not provide supporting evidence such as his flight records, crew member logs, or DFC narrative or citation. A complete copy of the SAF/MRBP evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04215

    Original file (BC-2011-04215.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He states the DFC was awarded to a member of his crew who may have found documentation for one particular mission – 19 Oct 44. As such, based on the applicant’s verifiable act of extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight, we believe it would be in the interest of equity and justice to award the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03117

    Original file (BC-2012-03117.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    They state, in part, that based upon the criteria used in 1943 there is no basis for any award. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the Congressman McIntyre’s office, on behalf of the applicant, via electronic mail (email) on 12 Aug 13 for review and comment within 30 days. Although official documents do reference the co-pilot being wounded, there...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0102353

    Original file (0102353.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although there is no longer any record of a DFC recommendation being submitted into official channels, they believe that it was submitted, but the FEAF Commander awarded him a Letter of Commendation, in lieu of the DFC. Although the applicant was recommended for the DFC, there is no evidence the recommendation was approved. _________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD: A majority of the Board finds insufficient evidence of error or injustice...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0100023

    Original file (0100023.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    He also completed three missions as a B-17F navigator. During World War II, the 8th Air Force had an established policy whereby a DFC was awarded upon the completion of 30 combat flight missions and an AM was awarded upon the completion of five missions. In 1944, the 8th Air Force required completion of 30 combat flight missions; however, the applicant did not complete 30 missions.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03723

    Original file (BC 2013 03723.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 | CY2004 | BC-2004-00644

    Original file (BC-2004-00644.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00644 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) and an Oak Leaf Cluster to the Purple Heart (PH) Medal. There is no evidence in his records of a recommendation for award of the DFC. Military Personnel Record Exhibit C. Letter,...