Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00355
Original file (BC-2003-00355.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-00355
            INDEX CODE:  107.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC).

2.  He be promoted to the grade of master sergeant based on  the  fact
that he was a Prisoner of War (POW) during World War II.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

What brought on this request was last month he attended a  reunion  of
his old bomb group (384th).  While talking with many of the  men,  the
conversation got around to awards and medals.  He was shot down on his
21st mission and taken as a prisoner of war (POW).   All  of  the  men
that he spoke to received the DFC after flying 21, 22, 23,  24  or  25
missions.  Most of these men started flying combat after he  was  shot
down.  He also learned that the 384th  Bomb  Group  received  a  group
citation for an air strike in January of 1944, which he was a part of.

There  is  no  injustice  in  his  case.   He  is  simply   requesting
advancement as a former POW.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a  personal  statement,  a
copy of his DD Form 214, a copy of his  discharge  certificate  and  a
copy of request for promotion.

Applicant's complete submission,  with  attachments,  is  attached  at
Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Army Air Force on 5 August 1942.

Applicant served on Active Duty during the period 19 August 1942 to  6
September 1945, with an overseas tour in Europe during the  period  30
September 1943 to 2 June 1945.  He was shot  down  and  taken  POW  in
Austria on 13 April 1944 and returned to military  control  on  3  May
1945.  His Report of Separation reflects award of the Air Medal with 3
Oak Leaf Clusters.  He is  also  entitled  to  the  American  Campaign
Medal, World War II  Victory  medal,  European-African-Middle  Eastern
Campaign Medal with 1 Bronze Service Star, and POW Medal.  His  Report
of Separation has been updated to  reflect  all  verified  awards  and
decorations.

On 19 February 2003, DPPPR informed the  applicant  that  his  records
were destroyed in the 1973 fire  at  the  National  Personnel  Records
Center, and he had not provided any documentation to show that he  was
recommended for award of the  DFC.   He  was  asked  to  withdraw  his
application until such time that he could obtain a signed and endorsed
recommendation package for the DFC.  He did not respond.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPR  states  that  the   applicant   has   not   provided   any
documentation showing he was recommended for,  or  awarded,  the  DFC.
The DFC is not awarded for having been shot down and taken POW when an
individual has already received recognition for  aerial  achievements.
Therefore, they recommend denial of applicant’s request.

A complete copy of the evaluation, with  attachment,  is  attached  at
Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPPWB states that a review of the applicant’s  record  indicates
he was a POW from 13 April  1944  to  3  May  1945,  approximately  13
months.  Military Personnel Division,  ASF,  Department  of  the  Army
Message 212259Z Sep 45, states that recovered personnel must have been
absent from military control under honorable conditions  for  eighteen
months or longer, and have not yet  received  a  one  grade  promotion
since return to military control, in order to be eligible  for  a  POW
promotion.  Since the applicant was a POW for approximately 13 months,
he does not meet the prerequisites for a promotion.   Therefore,  they
recommend denial of applicant’s request.

A complete copy of their evaluation is attached at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 30 May 2003, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded  to
the applicant for review and response within  30  days.   As  of  this
date, no response has been received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

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.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the  existence  of  error  or  injustice.   We  took  notice  of   the
applicant's complete submission in judging the  merits  of  the  case;
however, we agree with the opinions and  recommendations  of  the  Air
Force and adopt their rationale as the basis for the  conclusion  that
the applicant has not been  the  victim  of  an  error  or  injustice.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to  the  contrary,  we  find  no
compelling basis to recommend  granting  the  relief  sought  in  this
application.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of 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, Docket
No. BC-2003-00355 in Executive Session  on  9  July  2003,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                       Ms. Brenda L. Romine, Panel Chair
                       Mr. E. David Hoard, Member
                       Mr. James W. Russell III, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Forms 149, dated 9 Oct 02, and 6 Feb 03,
               w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 9 May 03, w/atchs.
      Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 12 May 03, w/atch.
      Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 May 03.




                             BRENDA L. ROMINE
                             Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03684

    Original file (BC-2002-03684.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: AFPC/DPWCM recommends the applicant’s request for award of the POW Medal be denied. On 22 October 1944, he provided the information that immediately after being shot down, he was picked up by partisans, evading capture by the enemy. After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the applicant’s contentions, we are not persuaded he should be awarded the PH, DFC, and POW Medal.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02556

    Original file (BC-2002-02556.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02556 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) and his Air Medal (AM) be updated to reflect 28 missions flown during World War II. AFPC/DPPPR evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-04015

    Original file (BC-2003-04015.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    After thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and noting the statement from the former POW, the majority of the Board is not persuaded the applicant was wounded as a direct result of enemy action. The applicant is a former Army Air Corps B-17, Flying Fortress, navigator who seeks award of the Purple Heart (PH) for wounds received during a bombing mission over Berlin, Germany, on 20 February 1944. The majority of the panel finds insufficient evidence to demonstrate that he was injured...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03307

    Original file (BC-2003-03307.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Air Medal (AM) that was awarded to him on 4 November 2002 by the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) is not the appropriate decoration for his actions. The control cables were severed, and the aircraft could not be landed safely without the cables controlling the flaps. DPPPR states the DFC is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by heroism or extraordinary achievement while participating in flight.

  • 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 | 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 | CY2003 | BC-2003-01051

    Original file (BC-2003-01051.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Further, DPPPR argues to award the applicant the DFC after he was awarded a medal for his actions would be an injustice to all other recipients of the AM awarded for actions similar to those of the applicant. DPPRSP’s letter to the applicant, with attachments, is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant submitted additional documentation, through his congressman, withdrawing his request for the AFC and requested that his AM be upgraded to a DFC. Applicant’s...

  • 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 | CY2001 | 0002114

    Original file (0002114.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Recognition Programs Branch, AFPC/DPPPR, reviewed this application and indicated that to be awarded the Purple Heart Medal, a member must provide documentation to support he was wounded as a direct result of enemy action. Accordingly, we recommend that the applicant’s records be corrected to reflect award of the DFC. We note the applicant’s request that his records be corrected to reflect award of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02730

    Original file (BC-2002-02730.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He should be awarded the PH because he was hit by shrapnel from enemy fire and should be awarded the DFC because he completed over 25 combat missions. The applicant also states that during the period in question, the 8th Air Force had an established policy whereby the DFC was awarded upon the completion of 25 combat missions. ...