.
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE MATTER OF:
DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00153
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
FEB 1 9 1999
He be awarded the Air Medal, Seventh Oak Leaf Cluster (AM, 7
OLC) .
He should have been awarded the
enemy aircraft on 2 April 1944:
never documented in his records,'
certificate.
In support of the appeal, applicant submits a copy of the
narrative report of the 2 April 1944 mission.
The applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A,
AM, 7 OLC, for destroying an
however, the information was
nor included on his discharge
~
STATEM ENT 0 F FACTS:
The applicant records were destroyed in the 1973 fire at the
National Personnel Records Center; therefore, the following
information has been obtained from the documents submitted by the
applicant,
On 22 December 1942, the applicant was inducted into the Army Air
Corps and entered active duty on 31 December 1942. He performed
duty as an Airplane Armorer Gunner and was awarded the Air Medal,
with Sixth Oak Leaf Cluster (AM, 6 OLC).
On 30 September 1945, the applicant was honorably discharged
under the provisions of AR 615-365 (Convenience of the
Government) in the grade of staff sergeant. He completed 2
years, 2 months and 7 days of active service, with 6 months and
22 days of foreign service.
.
The Recognition Programs Branch, AFPC/DPPPRA, reviewed this
application and states that since the applicant's records have
been destroyed, and there is no documentation to show the date(s)
for which the Air Medal and Oak Leaf Clusters were awarded during
World War 11, they cannot verify whether or not he has already
received recognition for the 2 April 1944 shooting down of an
enemy aircraft. The applicant has failed to provide sufficient
documentation to substantiate his claim that he is entitled to
any additional Oak Leaf Clusters to the Air Medal or any other
additional awards or decorations. Therefore, they recommend
denial of his request.
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at
Exhibit B.
APPLICANT 'S REVIEW OF AIR FORC E EVALUATIO N:
The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states that
he has provided a letter which is proof that he destroyed an ME-
109 on 2 April 1944.
The applicant's complete response, with attachment, is attached
at Exhibit D. .
The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing
1.
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 probable error or injustice. After
thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the
applicant's contentions, we are not persuaded that he should be
awarded the AM, 7 OLC. The applicant contends that based on the
documentation he has provided which indicates that he shot down
an ME-109 on 2 April 1944, he should have been awarded the AM, 7
OLC. However, we find no evidence the applicant should have been
automatically awarded the AM, 7 OLC, based on the destruction of
an ME-109 on 2 April 1944. To the contrary, we note that during
World War 11, the applicant's numbered Air Force (14th Air Force)
was awarding AMs upon the destruction of 3 enemy aircraft. In
view of this, and based on the evidence of record, we do not
believe he has been the victim of an error or injustice. The
personal sacrifice the applicant has endured for his country is
2
noted and our decision should in no way lessens his service;
however, insufficient documentary evidence has been presented to’
warrant awarding him the AM. 7 OLC. Therefore, in the absence of
evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to
recommend granting the relief sought in this application.
HE BOARD DETERMINES T N :
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 1 October 1998, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603 :
Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Panel Chair
Mr. Robert W. Zook, Member
Mr. Edward H. Parker, Member
Mr. Phillip E. Horton, Examiner (without vote)
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Nov 95, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPPPRA, dated 13 Feb 98, w/atchs.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 9 Mar 98.
Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 13 Mar 98, w/atch.
3
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02533A
For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the application, and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit E. In a letter, dated 26 February 2003, the applicant’s Congressman requests reconsideration of his application and provides additional documentation. Although a copy of the orders/citation to accompany award of the AM, 4 OLC, are unavailable, in his letter of 19 October 2000, the applicant states that he received this...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | bc-2004-01457
The applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, in the absence of official documentation to substantiate the total number of combat missions he completed, we find insufficient documentary evidence has been presented to warrant awarding him additional Air Medals. Should the applicant provide statements from other crew members who served with him on the same combat mission flights and were awarded nine AMs, the Board will reconsider his request. ...
In support of the appeal, applicant submits a copy of his WD AGO Form 53-55 and a Letter of Recommendation, dated 29 May 1944, indicating that he completed a total of 25 combat missions and was awarded the DFC and AM, 3 OLC. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states that at the time he completed a total of 25 combat missions a member would be awarded a DFC and upon completion of every five combat...
In support of the appeal, applicant submits a Letter of Recommendation for award of the DFC, dated 2 August 1944, his personal statement, a certificate of his combat mission and combat time, a statement from the 439th Bombardment Squadron Adjutant indicating that the Squadron Intelligence Officer recommended the applicant for the DFC. On 22 August 1944, the applicant was recommended for award of the DFC based on his actions on 19 August 1944; however, we find no evidence as to the outcome...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03772
On 8 January 2004, HQ AFPC/DPPPRA advised the applicant his request did not meet the criteria for award of the PH and requested he provide documentation to support his injuries were incurred as a direct result of enemy action and also the injuries required or received medical treatment by medical personnel. As such, the Board was not required to review the applicant's Purple Heart request. ALBERT C. ELLETT Panel Member DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, D.C. Office of the Assistant...
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 | CY2008 | BC-2008-01826
In support of his request, the applicant submits his personal statement, Congressional correspondence, recommendations from his former commander/Director of Combat Operations Fifth Air Force, narrative recommendations, proposed citations, a statement from his wingman on the 28 June 1952 mission, extracts from his personal copies of his military records to include flight records, mission reports, a copy of the only other DSC awarded in the wing, translated Russian mission reports for...
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AUG 1 8 1998 IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00214 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross for service during World War 11. CHARLES E. BENNETT Panel Chair 2, AFBCMR 98-00214 DEPARTMENT O F THE AIR FORCE HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE PERSONNEL CENTER RANDOLPH AIR FORCE BASE TEXAS MEMORANDUM FOR AFBCMR FROM HQ AFPCLDPPPRA 550 C Street West Ste 12 Randolph AFB...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01457A
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01457 INDEX NUMBER: 107.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to show that he received five additional Air Medals (AMs). e. On 3 January 1944, he was awarded the Air Medal, Ninth Oak Leaf Cluster, for extraordinary achievement by...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00817
It was further indicated he was wounded in action because of “German civilian rioting injuries on fore head (sic).” A letter dated 24 October 1997 from AFPC indicates he is entitled to following awards and decorations: Purple Heart European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal w/3 BSS Korean Service Medal United Nations Service Medal Republic of Korea Presidential Unit Citation American Campaign Medal World War II Victory Medal POW Medal Army of Occupation Medal-Japan National Defense...