AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE MATTER OF:
L
DOCKET NUMBER: 98-10010
COUNSEL: NONE
(AF 18 101 9 8 4 )
HEARING DESIRED: NO
iL.
.
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His WD AGO Form 53-55, Enlisted Record and Report of Separation,
be corrected to reflect award of the Distinguished Flying Cross,
with 2 Oak Leaf Clusters, and the Air Medal, with 8 Oak Leaf
Clusters.
The applicant's request for award of the European-African-Middle
Eastern Campaign Medal, with 2 Bronze Service Stars, and the
Distinguished Unit Citation, with 1 Oak Leaf Cluster was
administratively corrected on 30 May 1997. Applicant's request
that the number of missions be corrected to reflect 61 was
administratively corrected on 17 March 1998. Hence, no Board
action is required on this portion of applicant's request.
-
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His records should be corrected to eliminate the errors.
*
In support of his request, applicant submits copies of his WD AGO
Form 53-55, his discharge certificate and additional documents
associated with the issues cited in his contentions. These
documents are appended at Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant's military personnel records were destroyed by fire in
1973.
Information extracted from applicant's WD AGO Form 53-55,
Enlisted Record and Report of Separation, reveals that the
applicant contracted his enlistment in the Army Air Corps on
1 May 1942. He was honorably discharged from the Army Air Corps
in the grade of staff sergeant (E-5) on 6 November 1945 f o r the
convenience of the government due to demobilization. He had
completed a total of 3 years, 6 months and 5 days at the time of
his discharge and had prior service of 2 years, 10 months and 22
days.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Recognition Programs Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPPRA, stated that the
applicant has provided no documentation to substantiate his claim
for additional oak leaf clusters to the Distinguished Flying
Cross or the Air Medal. DPPPRA stated that the applicant has
been informed on several occasions since 1992 that ,without
documentation to show that a recommendation was submitted in
writing through official channels within the required time limit,
they (DPPPRA) cannot verify his entitlement to any additional oak
leaf clusters.
DPPPRA indicated that the applicant has not
provided any documentation or even stated that a written
recommendation was submitted regarding any additional oak leaf
clusters. DPPPRA recommended the applicant's request for award
of 2 oak leaf clusters to the Distinguished Flying Cross and
eight oak leaf clusters to the Air Medal be denied. A complete
copy of this evaluation is appended at Exhibit C.
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on
30 June 1997 for review and response.
As of this date, no
response has been received by this office (Exhib'it E).
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
c
The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing
1.
law or regulations.
The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the
,2.
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 with
regard to award of the Distinguished Flying Cross, with 2 Oak
Leaf Clusters, and the Air Medal, with 8 Oak Leaf Clusters. 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
(HQ AFPC/DPPPRA) and adopt their rationale as the basis f o r o u r
conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error
or injustice. Other than his own assertions, the applicant has
not provided any documentation showing that a recommendation
package was placed into official military channels. Therefore,
absent sufficient evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon
which to recommend favorable action on his request.
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of probable material error or
2
98-10010
L
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 appliczi-tion in
Executive Session on 15 May 1998, under the provisions of AFI
36- 2603:
Mr. Leroy T. Baseman, Panel Chair
Mr. Steven A. Shaw, Member
Mr. Parker C. Horner, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. Letter from applicant, dated 27 May 97, with
DD Form 149, dated 12 Dec 91, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPRA, dated 1 3 Jun 97.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 30 Jun 97.
LEROY~ T. BASEMAN
Panel Chair
--
3
98-10010
His Report of Separation was reviewed and it was determined that he was entitled to the Air Medal with four (4) Oak Leaf Clusters (~OLCS), Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal with one (1) Silver and one (1) Bronze Service Star, Philippine Liberation Ribbon, American Campaign Medal, and World War I1 Victory Medal which were forwarded to applicant. Applicant requests award of the Silver Star Medal for World War I1 actions. Your Application for Correction of Military Record will be forwarded to...
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...
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...
Given the fact that this document was issued within a relatively short period of time following his separation, we must conclude that responsible officials had access to the applicant’s military records and determined that the applicant had been awarded the GCM. No documentary evidence has been presented to indicate that a recommendation for award of the DFC was officially submitted. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02015
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends the applicant’s request for award of the DFC and additional campaign credit for the Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal be denied. DPPPR recommends disapproval of the applicant’s request for award of the DFC for actions on 10 October 1944; additional campaign credit for the Asiatic- Pacific Campaign Medal; and, award of the Air Medal with fourth oak leaf cluster for the period 23...
During the period of 7 Oct 44 through 9 Apr 45, the applicant completed 30 operational missions. The applicant did not respond to DPPR’s letter requesting a copy of his Report of Separation. Without any additional documentation to support his request, DPPPR cannot verify the applicant’s eligibility for the DFC; therefore, they recommend the applicant’s request be denied (Exhibit B).
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...
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.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00644
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,...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC 2007 03992
At the time of his separation, his records reflect he was serving as a B-24 radar observer. They stated his separation document does not show that he was permanently awarded the aircrew member badge during his service; however, he was awarded the Air Medal with five oak leaf clusters and spent 21 months in the Pacific Theater. XXXXXXXXXXXXX Chair AFBCMR BC-2007-03992 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of...