Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02218
Original file (BC-2003-02218.doc) Auto-classification: Denied


                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-02218
            INDEX CODE:  108.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to reflect award of the Distinguished  Flying
Cross (DFC).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He flew 76 combat missions.  As a result, he was entitled to the DFC.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provided  personal  statements
and excerpts from his flight log book.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant’s available military  personnel  records  indicate  that  he
enlisted in the Army of the United States (AUS) on 12 Mar  44  in  the
grade of private.  He served overseas in the China-Burma-India Theater
of  Operations  from  17  Feb  45  to  27 Mar 46.   He  was  honorably
discharged on 7 Apr 46 in the grade of sergeant.  He was  awarded  the
Air Medal, Asiatic Pacific Campaign Medal,  Good  Conduct  Medal,  and
World War II Victory Medal.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPR recommended denial indicating that after 1944, the DFC  and
Air Medal were no longer awarded automatically, based on the number of
combat  missions  flown,  but  a  written  recommendation  had  to  be
submitted into official channels (signed by the recommending  official
and endorsed by the next higher official in  the  chain  of  command).
Since the applicant’s records were destroyed, and he has not  provided
any documentation showing a  written  recommendation  was  signed  and
submitted, AFPC/DPPPR stated that  they  were  unable  to  verify  his
eligibility for award of the DFC.

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 3 Oct
03 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.  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 opinion and recommendation of the Air Force
office of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt  their  rationale  as
the basis for our decision that the applicant has  failed  to  sustain
his burden that he has suffered either an error or an  injustice.   We
believe it should  be  pointed  out  that  the  applicant’s  decorated
service  and  sacrifice  for  his  country  has  not  gone  unnoticed.
Notwithstanding this, no evidence has been presented which  has  shown
to our satisfaction that the applicant met  the  established  criteria
for award of the DFC.  In view of the above, and  in  the  absence  of
sufficient 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2003-02218 in Executive Session on 4 Nov 03, under the  provisions  of
AFI 36-2603:

      Ms. Charlene Bradley, Panel Chair
      Ms. Cheryl Jacobson, Member
      Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 2 Jun 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 24 Sep 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Oct 03.




                                   CHARLENE BRADLEY
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02951

    Original file (BC-2003-02951.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    His records contain the orders for award of the basic Air Medal and the Air Medal with one oak leaf cluster, but nothing regarding a DFC. While we note that the applicant provided a copy of a citation to accompany the award of the DFC, he has not provided an approved order awarding him the DFC. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03619

    Original file (BC-2006-03619.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    In support of his application, the applicant submits a copy of his WD AGO Form 53-55, Enlisted Record and Report of Separation – Honorable Discharge, an eyewitness statement, his personal statement, a historical account of the mission, and a Board of Veterans’ Appeal Order. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that he was...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01569

    Original file (BC-2005-01569.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    DPPPR states the applicant’s official military record contains a WD AGO Form 106, Request for Decoration and/or Citation, for the Bronze Service Star and the DFC dated 20 February 1946; however, the form is only signed by the applicant who stated he was recommended for the DFC “For leading fighter planes over enemy territory.” There is no evidence to show that the decoration recommendation had ever been submitted through official channels or that the applicant was ever awarded the DFC. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02989

    Original file (BC-2005-02989.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    DPPPR states on 11 February 2006, the applicant’s package was forwarded to the approval authority, the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) for consideration. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Mar 06. CHARLENE M. BRADLEY Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2005-02989 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02835

    Original file (BC-2007-02835.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-02835 INDEX CODE: 100.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her deceased husband’s records be corrected to reflect award of the Purple Heart (PH). ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03571

    Original file (BC-2006-03571.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. However, the applicant was unable to provide the necessary documentation to be awarded the DFC. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03027

    Original file (BC-2006-03027.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His commander recommended him for the DFC and his Congressman has sent a letter of support to the Secretary of the Air Force (SAF). The SAF Personnel Council (SAFPC) considered his request and denied the DFC but recommended he be awarded the AM for achievement on 28 August 1943. DPPPR’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-01625

    Original file (BC-2007-01625.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    In this regard, we note insufficient evidence was presented to show he was recommended for, or awarded, the DFC. ________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00004

    Original file (BC-2003-00004.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s appeal and the rationale of the earlier decision of the Board, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit E. In a letter, dated 18 March 2001, the applicant provided additional documentation, to include a newspaper article regarding retroactive award of the DFC to a World War II veteran, and requested reconsideration of his application. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01321

    Original file (BC-2003-01321.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01321 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 241 be corrected to reflect award of the Air Force Achievement Medal (AFAM) for the period 25 June 1990 to 29 March 1992. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ...