Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-00446
Original file (BC-1998-00446.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  98-00446
                 INDEX CODE:  107

                 COUNSEL:  NONE

                 HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His DD Form 214, Report of Separation From the  Armed  Forces  of  the
United States, be corrected to reflect the award of the Air Medal.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He received the Air Medal for 19 combat missions he flew  over  Korea.
Applicant states that all combat veterans were  eligible  for  a  six-
month early discharge.  As the processing room was crowded and  clerks
were busy, he believes this was the cause for the oversight.

In support of his request, the applicant submits a copy of the DD Form
214 and a Letter of Accomplishments, dated  12  December  1952,  which
states in part that the applicant had flown 19 combat missions in  the
Korean theater.

Applicant’s submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

It appears that applicant’s military personnel records were  destroyed
by fire in 1973 at the National Personnel Records Center,  St.  Louis,
Missouri.  However,  the  available  records  reflect  that  applicant
enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 27 March 1950  in  the  grade  of
private.  He was subsequently honorably  discharged  on  14  September
1953 in the grade of staff sergeant.  He served 3 years 5  months  and
18 days of active service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Recognition Programs Branch, Promotions, Evaluation &  Recognition
Division, HQ AFPC/DPPPRA, states that the applicant served  on  active
duty 27 March 1950 to 14 September 1953 and was stationed  on  Okinawa
from 12 June 1952 to 9  December  1952.   He  provided  a  picture  of
himself  receiving  the  Air  Medal  but  does  not  have  any   other
documentation  to  verify  this  decoration.   On   7 May   1998,   HQ
AFPC/DPPPRA requested the Historical Research Center  at  Maxwell  Air
Force Base, Alabama to search their files for a copy  of  the  orders.
However, they were unable to locate a copy of any orders awarding  the
applicant any decorations.

Since the applicant’s records were destroyed by fire  in  1973,  there
are no documents regarding his service, except those he has  provided.
Without a copy of the orders, they cannot verify  that  the  applicant
was recommended for or awarded the  Air  Medal.   A  photograph  in  a
newspaper is not considered sufficient justification  to  comply  with
the applicant’s request.  They recommend the  applicant’s  request  be
denied.

A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the  applicant  on
29 June 1998 for review and  response.   A  copy  of  the  applicant’s
response, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of probable error or  injustice  warranting  relief.   After
reviewing the limited military personnel records and  the  applicant’s
submission, it appears that he was awarded the  Air  Medal.   Although
there  is  no  evidence  in  the  available  military  record  or   in
applicant’s submission, i.e., an order or citation for  the  award  in
question to indicate he was awarded this decoration, we note that  the
applicant served in Korea and  apparently  flew  at  least  19  combat
missions.  It appears that individuals who flew a minimum of 10 combat
missions during the contested time period  were  entitled  to  an  Air
Medal.  Further, we also note the official photograph of the applicant
receiving the award from his superior officer.  In view of  the  above
and in an effort to offset an injustice to the applicant, 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 the DD Form 214,
Report of Separation From the Armed Forces of the United States, Item
27., Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and
Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, be amended by adding:  “Air
Medal.”

_______________________________________________________________________
_____________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 2 February 1999, under the provisions of AFI  36-
2603:

                  Mr. Michael P. Higgins, Panel Chair
                  Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Member
              Mr. Patrick R. Wheeler, Member

All members  voted  to  correct  the  records,  as  recommended.   The
following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 11 Feb 98, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Available Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPRA, dated 10 Jun 98.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 Jun 98.
   Exhibit E.  Applicant’s Letter, dated 4 Jul 98.




                              MICHAEL P. HIGGINS
                              Panel Chair


INDEX CODE:  107

AFBCMR 98-00446




MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

      Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air
Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority
of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is
directed that:

      The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air
Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that the DD Form 214,
Report of Separation From the Armed Forces of the United States, Item
27, Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign
Ribbons Awarded or Authorized, be, and hereby is, amended by adding:
“Air Medal.”







   JOE G. LINEBERGER

   Director

   Air Force Review Boards Agency

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9800446

    Original file (9800446.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Without a copy of the orders, they cannot verify that the applicant was recommended for or awarded the Air Medal. A copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 29 June 1998 for review and response. After reviewing the limited military personnel records and the applicant’s submission, it appears that...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-00969

    Original file (BC-1998-00969.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    United States Air Forces in Europe (USAFE) major command (MAJCOM) denied this award on grounds that he was a flight surgeon and thus considered no more than a passenger on these flights, while other flight surgeons (assigned to different commands) were awarded this medal during the same period for participating on the same flight missions. HQ USAFE supplemented this regulation with additional criteria, to be applied to regularly assigned aircrew members, but not to flight surgeons. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9800969

    Original file (9800969.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    United States Air Forces in Europe (USAFE) major command (MAJCOM) denied this award on grounds that he was a flight surgeon and thus considered no more than a passenger on these flights, while other flight surgeons (assigned to different commands) were awarded this medal during the same period for participating on the same flight missions. HQ USAFE supplemented this regulation with additional criteria, to be applied to regularly assigned aircrew members, but not to flight surgeons. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9801710

    Original file (9801710.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2006 | BC-2006-00935

    Original file (BC-2006-00935.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Further without evidence to verify the applicant was recommended for the SS his request could not be favorably considered. His records do not reflect that he was recommended for, or awarded the SS. Novel, Panel Chair Mr. Reginald P. Howard, Member Mr. James A. Wolffe, Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2006-00325 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 17 Mar 06, w/atchs.

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9802524

    Original file (9802524.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no indication in his records, and he did not provide any documentation, showing he was recommended for the DFC or an oak leaf cluster to his AM. The operative word in [the former group commander’s] statement that the Chief apparently overlooked is “Before” [emphasis applicant’s]. Therefore, the criteria for that command was not completion of a specified number of missions (35) before being recommended for the DFC and completing a tour.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02068

    Original file (BC-2005-02068.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02068 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Purple Heart Medal (PHM), and the (POW) prisoner-of- war medal; therefore, his POW status must be reviewed. He was shot down on his first mission and was interned in Sweden until he was returned to military...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9803028

    Original file (9803028.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2005 | bc-2005-01522

    Original file (bc-2005-01522.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    He should be awarded the DFC for his actions on 23 June 1952. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that the AmnM is awarded for voluntary risk of life not involving actual combat and the applicant’s actions on 23 June 1952 were previously recognized in the AM he was awarded for numerous operational flights from 8 May 1953 to 23 June 1952. On 14 June 1952, he was awarded...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9703191

    Original file (9703191.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Air Force indicates that AF Form 7 (Airman Military Record), Item 2, reflects the applicant served in the Air Force from 25 Oct 66 - 16 Sep 79, with two tours in Taiwan: 30 Apr 67 - 30 May 68 2 JUl 69 - 2 OCt 70 Airlift Squadron Organizational Maintenance On 10 Nov 97, AFPC/DPAIPl requested the applicant furnish copies of TDY orders, Travel Vouchers, etc., in order to substantiate his claim. In response, the applicant submitted a photograph and a letter from an individual, dated 28 Nov...