AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

  DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00730 
  COUNSEL:  NONE 
  HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

 
  IN THE MATTER OF: 
 
 (DECEASED) 
  APPLICANT:  
   
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
Her late husband be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) 
for bombing missions during World War II (WWII). 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
She believes that her late husband was not awarded the DFC due 
to an administrative error.  He flew 46 combat missions between 
August  24,  1944  and  April  21,  1945.    In  researching  this 
information she found there was a lot of confusion regarding the 
criteria for awarding the DFC by various commands at that time.  
She  believes  her  late  husband  met  the  necessary  criteria  prior 
to departing England in 1945.   
 
In  support  of  her  request,  the  applicant  provides  copies  of 
documents  extracted  from  his  military  personnel  record,  a  copy 
of  his  death  certificate,  a  copy  of  the  “Distinguished  Flying 
Cross and Air Medal Criteria in the Army Air Forces in World War 
II” by Barry L. Spink, Archivist, Air Force Historical Research 
Agency, and other supporting documents.   
 
The  applicant's  complete  submission,  with  attachments,  is  at 
Exhibit A. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
Documents  in  the  decedent’s  Military  Personnel  Record  indicate 
he  served  in  the  Army  Air  Corp  from  8  February  1944  to 
30 October 1945 in the grade of Captain (Capt).  He was awarded 
the  Air  Medal  with  six  oak  leaf  clusters  (AM  w/6  OLC)  for  his 
service  in  the  European  Theater  from  27  July  1944  to 
7 June 1945.    Information  submitted  by  the  applicant  reflects 
the decedent died on 6 December 1999. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
 
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

 

in 

their 

response 

and 

channels 

 
HQ AFPC/DPSIDRA recommends denial.  DPSIDRA states the applicant 
did not provide a signed recommendation from someone within the 
chain of command who has firsthand knowledge of the incident, a 
proposed  citation,  chain  of  command  endorsement(s),  nor 
eyewitness  statement(s);  furthermore  the  request  was  not 
submitted  through  congressional  channels.    Over  the  years  the 
decedent  and  the  applicant  have  placed  numerous  requests  for 
entitlement  to  the  DFC.    Each  request  yielded  no  official 
documentation  verifying  entitlement  to  the  DFC.    On 
3 December 1994  the  decedent  wrote  to  their  office  requesting 
entitlement  to  the  DFC  and  on  10  March  1995,  they  advised  him 
that they were unable to verify his entitlement to the DFC.  On 
20 November 1998 the applicant wrote to the Veterans of Foreign 
Wars of the United States and on 11 December 1998 the Assistant 
Director,  Veterans  Benefits  Policy,  National  Veterans  Service 
advised  her  that  a  written  recommendation  must  be  made  from 
someone  who  has  firsthand  knowledge  of  the  act  or  achievement.  
In  August  1999  the  applicant  submitted  a  request  through 
congressional 
dated 
14 September 1999, DPSIDRA provided the applicant a copy of the 
National  Defense  Authorization    Act  (NDAA)  rules  along  with  a 
checklist of documentation needed to submit the DFC request and 
a list of potential sources of information.   
 
The DFC may be awarded to any persons who, after 16 April 1917, 
while  serving  in  any  capacity  with  the  United  States  Armed 
Forces,  distinguished  themselves  by  heroism  or  extraordinary 
achievement  while  participating  in  aerial  flight.    Heroism  or 
achievement  must  be  entirely  distinctive,  involving  operations 
that  are  not  routine.    The  DFC  is  not  awarded  for  sustained 
operational flights.   
 
 
The complete DPSIDRA evaluation is at Exhibit C. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
A  copy  of  the  Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the 
applicant  for  review  and  comment  (Exhibit  D).    To  date,  this 
office has not received a response.   
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
The SAFPC recommends denial.  SAFPC states although the criteria 
for  award  of  the  Air  Medal  (AM)  and  Distinguished  Flying  Cross 
(DFC)  changed  numerous  times  during  the  decedent’s  period  of 
service,  it  is  clear  by  the  award  of  the  AMs  that  he  was 
appropriately  recognized  with  the  AM  in  a  timely  manner 

 

 
2 

following  or  just  prior  to  each  period  of  qualifying  mission 
completion.    There  is  no  evidence  in  the  decedent’s  military 
personnel  record  nor  that  provided  by  the  applicant  that 
indicates  that  the  decedent  was  (or  should  have  been) 
recommended for the DFC.   
 
The complete SAFPC evaluation is at Exhibit E 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
A  copy  of  the  Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the 
applicant  for  review  and  comment  (Exhibit  F).    To  date,  this 
office has not received a response.   
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
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 SAFPC and adopt 
their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant 
has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  The personal 
sacrifice the decedent endured for our country is noted; however, 
insufficient evidence has been presented to warrant award of the 
DFC.    Therefore,  in  the  absence  of  evidence  to  the  contrary,  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. 
 

 

 
3 

 
  

  Panel Chair 
  Member 
  Member 

________________________________________________________________ 
 
The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-
2012-00730  in  Executive  Session  on  18  December  2012,  under  the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 
 
 
 
The  following  documentary  evidence  pertaining  to  Docket  Number 
BC-2012-00730 was considered: 
 
    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 January 2012, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. 
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIDRA, dated 27 April 2012. 
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 May 2012. 
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAFPC, dated 27 November 2012. 
    Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 28 November 2012. 
 
 
 
 
 
                                   Panel Chair 
 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 
4