Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002915
Original file (0002915.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  00-02915
            INDEX CODE:  107.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Enlisted Record and Report of Separation be corrected  to  reflect
award of the Good Conduct Medal and the Distinguished Flying Cross.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

No contentions were made and no supporting documents were submitted.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant’s Transcript of Military Record, AGO Form 01254,  issued  by
the U.S. Army on 15 Dec 49, reflects award of the Good Conduct  Medal,
Air Medal with 4 Oak Leaf  Clusters  and  the  European-African-Middle
Eastern (EAME) Campaign Medal with 3 Bronze Service Stars.

The relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the
letter  prepared  by  the  appropriate  office  of  the   Air   Force.
Accordingly, there is no need to recite these facts in this Record  of
Proceedings.
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Recognition  Programs  Branch,  HQ  AFPC/DPPPR,  stated  that  the
applicant served on active duty during the period 5 Oct 42-13 Sep  45,
with an overseas tour during the period 21  May  44-20  Oct  44.   The
American Campaign Medal and World  War  II  Victory  Medal  have  been
administratively added to the applicant’s Report of  Separation.   The
applicant’s records were destroyed in the 1973 fire  at  the  National
Personnel Records Center.  DPPPR indicated that the applicant has been
informed that there is no indication he was ever recommended for award
of the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC), and he has not  provided  any
documentation showing that a recommendation was written  or  submitted
into  official  channels.   The  applicant  has   not   provided   any
justification  for  awarding  him  the  DFC.   DPPPR  recommended  the
applicant’s request to add the DFC to  his  Report  of  Separation  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  22
November 2000 for review and response.  As of this date,  no  response
has been received by this office (Exhibit D).
_________________________________________________________________

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.  After a careful  review  of
the available military records, we are persuaded that the  applicant’s
separation document should reflect award of  the  Good  Conduct  Medal
(GCM).  We base our decision  on  the  relevance  of  the  applicant’s
Transcript of Military Records, issued by the Department of  the  Army
on 15 Dec 49, which reflects award of the GCM.  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.  We  therefore  believe  that,  in
this case, any doubt should be resolved in favor of the applicant  and
his WD AGO 53-55, Enlisted Record and Report of Separation, should  be
amended to reflect receipt of the GCM.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented  to  demonstrate
the existence of probable error or injustice with respect to award  of
the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC).   No  documentary  evidence  has
been presented to indicate that a recommendation for award of the  DFC
was officially submitted.  Therefore, in the  absence  of  documentary
evidence substantiating that the applicant  was  recommended  for  the
requested award and that such a recommendation was approved,  we  find
no compelling basis to recommend approval of the  applicant’s  request
for award of the DFC.
_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the  Department  of  the  Air  Force
relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that his WD AGO Form 53-55,
Enlisted Record and Report of Separation, issued in  conjunction  with
his honorable discharge on 13 September 1945, reflects he was  awarded
the Good Conduct Medal.
_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 16 January 2001, under the provisions of AFI  36-
2603:

                  Mr. Benedict A. Kausal IV, Panel Chair
                  Ms. Olga M. Crerar, Member
              Mr. Richard M. McCormick, Member

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

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 3 Aug 00.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPR, dated 6 Nov 00, w/atch.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 22 Nov 00.




                                   BENEDICT A. KAUSAL IV
                                   Panel Chair



AFBCMR 00-02915




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 his WD AGO Form
53-55, Enlisted Record and Report of Separation, issued in conjunction
with his honorable discharge on 13 September 1945, reflects he was
awarded the Good Conduct Medal.




            JOE G. LINEBERGER
                                        Director
                                        Air Force Review Boards Agency

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01949

    Original file (BC-2005-01949.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states upon completion of his last mission on 9 September 1944 only officers were awarded the DFC. The evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 29 July 2005, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days. With respect to the issue of the DFC, the Board finds no supporting documentation in...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0101031

    Original file (0101031.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02533

    Original file (BC-2002-02533.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In the case of World War II decorations, 3 May 51 was established as the cut-off date for submission of recommendations for decorations for acts or achievements during this time period. The applicant’s records showed that he completed only 14 flights, which led to award of two Air Medals for completion of five missions for each Air Medal, and shot down two enemy aircraft, which led to award of two more Air Medals. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01538

    Original file (BC-2004-01538.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Therefore, the following information has been extracted from the documentation provided by applicant. Regardless, although the Eighth Air Force had an established policy from 1942 to 1944, whereby a DFC was awarded upon the completion of 25 heavy bomber missions, in 1944, the total number of missions for award of a DFC was increased from 25 to 35. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2004-01538 in...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01096

    Original file (BC-2004-01096.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01096 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to show that he was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC). Since there was no evidence in the applicant’s military record that he was recommended for, or awarded, the DFC, they are unable to verify...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02780

    Original file (BC-2004-02780.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He received $100.00 at the time of his discharge but never received the additional $200.00. He did not receive the additional AM, nor did he receive the medal the crew officers recommended him for a deed up and beyond the call of duty. The applicant did not provide any documentation to support award of the AM or DFC.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02015

    Original file (BC-2003-02015.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02084

    Original file (BC-2005-02084.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    After a thorough review of the applicant’s military personnel record, they are unable to find evidence that he was recommended for award of the DFC. We note the letters from two crew members who served with the applicant who indicate they were also promised the DFC for completing 50 missions flown while participating in combat. While the Board does recognize his extraordinary accomplishments in the defense of our nation during wartime, we note there is no indication in the applicant’s...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00644

    Original file (BC-2004-00644.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 | CY2003 | BC-2002-02945

    Original file (BC-2002-02945.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was not present to receive the award because he was in the hospital. The applicant has not provided any documentation showing he was recommended for a DFC, nor has he provided any documentation showing he was eligible to receive the DFC. However, should the applicant provide documentation pertaining to the units he was assigned, statements from crewmembers and proof of his POW status, this Board would be willing to review the materials for possible reconsideration.