AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE MATTER OF:
DOCKET NUMBER: 97-017016
COUNSEL :
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be corrected to reflect award of the Medal of Honor.
~~
~~~
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was recommended for award of the Medal of Honor for gallantry
and intrepidity in action on 15-16 July 1945. The original
recommendation was believed to have been destroyed by a severe
tropical storm and never arrived at higher headquarters after the
90th Bomb Group relocated.
In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a statement from
counsel, supportive statements, copy of a resubmitted
recommendation for award of the Medal of Honor, and other
documents associated with the matter under review.
Applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
A WD AGO Form 53-55, Enlisted Record and Report of Separation,
indicates that the applicant was inducted into the Army of the
United States (Air Corps), on 29 Jan 44 and entered active duty
on 12 Mar 44 as an aerial gunner. He performed duties in the
Asiatic-Pacific Theater of Operations from 17 May 1946 until
7 January 1946. He was progressively promoted to the grade of
staff sergeant.
By Department of the Air Force General Order 74, dated 15 Sep 55,
the applicant was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross for
extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight on
15 Jul 45. He was also awarded the Air Medal for meritorious
achievement while participating in aerial flight from Mar 45 to
Jun 45 by the same order.
He was honorably discharged from the Army of the United States
because of demobilization on 1 Feb 46. He had served 1 year, 10
months and 20 days on active duty. He had participated in the
Borneo, Philippines Islands, China, New Guinea, Bismark
Archipelago, and Western Pacific battles and campaigns.
His
separation document indicates that he was entitled to the Purple
Heart Medal, the Asiatic-Pacific Service Medal with 5 Bronze
Stars, Philippine Liberation Service Medal with 1 Bronze Star,
World War I1 Victory Medal, and the American Theater Campaign
Medal.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Recognition Programs Branch, AFPC/DPPPRA, reviewed this
application and recommended denial. According to DPPPRA, the
applicant has been previously informed that he had already been
awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross for his actions on
14 Jul 45 and could not be recommended for or receive another
decoration for those actions.
A complete copy of the DPPPRA evaluation, with attachment, is at
Exhibit C.
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
By letter, dated 30 Jul 97, counsel requested that no action be
taken on the applicant's case until prior to the submission of
additional documentary evidence. However, counsel indicated that
it was his understanding that any award to an individual for a
military decoration may be upgraded upon submission of proper
evidence and proof that the records are in error (Exhibit E).
Counsel provided additional documentary evidence for the Board's
consideration which is attached at Exhibit F.
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
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
3 . Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented
to
demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
We
note that the Secretary of the Air Force is not the approving
authority for the Medal of Honor, and, that this Board may only
make a recommendation to the approving authority that the
applicant be awarded the Medal of Honor. Notwithstanding this
fact, after reviewing the evidence presented, we agree with the
the
2
AFBCMR 97-01706
opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary
responsibility (OPR) and adopt their rationale as the basis for
our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an
error or injustice. We are not unappreciative of the applicant's
actions in the service of the Nation. However, since he was
previously recognized for his extraordinary achievement for the
period in question and we have seen no persuasive evidence that
his actions meet the criteria in 1 9 4 5 for award of the Medal of
Honor, the applicant's request for award of the Medal of Honor is
not favorably considered.
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 issues 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 probable 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 20 Oct 98, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel Chair
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Member
Mr. Jackson A. Hauslein, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit
Exhibit
Exhibit
Exhibit
Exhibit
Exhibit
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
DD Form 149, dated 2 Jun 97, w/atchs.
Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Letter, AFPC/DPPPRA, dated 26 Jun 97.
Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 14 Jul 97.
Letter, counsel, dated 30 Jul 97.
Letter, counsel, dated 1 4 Aug 97, w/atchs.
Panel Chair
3
AFBCMR 97- 01706
b
However, the evidence provided has established to our satisfaction that the applicant‘s service during the period in question did warrant recognition by award of the Air Medal and that the recommendation for this award was submitted and lost. RECOMMENDATION. We recommend disapproval of the applicant’s request for award of the Distinguished Flying Cross for 15 Jul45 and the Air Medal for Mar 45-Jul45 and Jun 45-Sep 45.
These documents are appended at Exhibit A. DPPPRA stated that the applicant was discharged on 16 Nov 45 and has not provided any documentation showing he made any effort to resolve the issue of additional oak leaf clusters for his DFC or AM prior to this application. A complete copy of this evaluation is appended at Exhibit C. 2 98-01710 APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He stated that he cannot be held responsible for changes in administrative personnel or priorities during war...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01180
The following information was extracted from documents provided by the applicant (the member’s son) at Exhibit A and by the Air Force at Exhibit C. The applicant originally appealed through his Congressional representative on 10 Dec 01. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR notes the applicant has not provided any documentation showing his father was an officer and a pilot, awarded the DFC, demoted by court-martial from an...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01569
DPPPR states the applicant’s official military record contains a WD AGO Form 106, Request for Decoration and/or Citation, for the Bronze Service Star and the DFC dated 20 February 1946; however, the form is only signed by the applicant who stated he was recommended for the DFC “For leading fighter planes over enemy territory.” There is no evidence to show that the decoration recommendation had ever been submitted through official channels or that the applicant was ever awarded the DFC. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00172
[Note: Pursuant to an inquiry by the AFBCMR Staff, HQ AFPC/DPPPRA advised via 13 Jul 06 email that they had noted the BSM certificate provided by the applicant (Exhibit A) but as they could find no special order or other evidence in the applicant’s file that he received the basic award, they did not recommend his separation documents be administratively corrected to reflect receipt of that decoration.] In response, the applicant provided a handwritten letter with the original BSM...
He recommended the applicant for award of the DFC. A second crewmember (position unidentified, but held the rank of first lieutenant) provided an affidavit stating he had received the DFC “as did several other members of this crew.” He also recommended the applicant be awarded the DFC for his accomplishments as tail gunner and provided a proposed citation. After a thorough review of the evidence presented, to include the statements from members of the applicant’s crew, we are sufficiently...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: 02-01288 INDEX CODE 107.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Air Medal with 4th Oak Leaf Cluster (AM 4OLC) awarded for accomplishments on 10 Oct 44 be upgraded to a Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC 2011 03890
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of the applicants request for award of the BSM w/1OLC, PH w/3OLCs, CIB, PUC w/2OLCs, PRPUC, APCM and Gold Star Lapel Ribbon On 5 Dec 13, the PH Review Board reviewed and approved the applicants request that his uncle be awarded the PH. While we have no documentary evidence that confirms, with any certainty, what period the former member was assigned to the 3rd...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00372
Therefore, the facts surrounding his Air Force military service cannot be verified. He entered active duty on 1 June 1944 and was assigned to duties in the Air Corps. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 1 June 1945, he was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross for heroism while participating as a member of an aircrew...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03253
Counsel provides, among other documents, the Group History of HQ 40th Bombardment Group (40BG) recounting the Japanese air raid on 25 Dec 44; the applicant’s sworn affidavit; a 1982 statement from the flight surgeon assigned to the 25th Bombardment Squadron (25BS), 40BG, in India describing his treatment of the applicant’s knee injury; a letter from the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) advising the applicant’s service records could not be found and were likely lost in the 1973 fire;...