RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03191
INDEX NUMBER: 107.00
XXXXXXX COUNSEL: VETERANS SERVICE OFFICE
XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be awarded the Combat Action Ribbon and “stars added to medals,
especially Air Medal (7).”
_________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was a turret gunner during World War II and the Combat Action Ribbon
(CAR) was omitted from his records.
In support of the appeal, applicant submits extracts from his personnel
records.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant served in the Army Air Corps, as an airplane armorer gunner
from 3 November 1943 through 6 November 1945. He contracted his initial
enlistment with the Air Force on 22 August 1947, for a period of three
years. From 17 September 1944 through 2 March 1945, he served in the
European-African-Middle Eastern theatre of operation. He was honorably
discharged in the grade of staff sergeant on 21 August 1951, for expiration
of term of service.
In a letter, dated 1 December 2003, AFPC/DPPPRA notified the applicant of
his entitlement to the World War II Victory Medal; the European-African-
Middle Eastern Campaign Medal, with two bronze service stars; and the Air
Medal (AM), with one silver oak leaf cluster.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPPR recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that
without official documentation showing he was awarded two additional AMs,
they are unable to verify his entitlement to the AM, with seven oak leaf
clusters. In addition, the CAR was not established until 17 February 1969,
and was only awarded to members of the U.S. Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast
Guard. Since the applicant was discharged on 6 November 1945, he is not
eligible for the CAR.
The AFPC/DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant
and his counsel on 6 February 2004 for review and response within 30 days.
However, as of this date, this office has received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
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 and adopt their rationale as the basis for our 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 Docket Number BC-2003-03191
in Executive Session on 1 April 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Panel Chair
Ms. Martha A. Maust, Member
Mr. Vance E. Lineberger, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 Apr 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 28 Jan 04.
Exhibit D. Letters, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Feb 04.
ROSCOE HINTON, JR.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00358
The AFPC/DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Counsel states that, among other things, that the requested relief should be favorably considered based on the recommendation of the member’s former commander and in view of the established Eighth Air Force policy in effect during the period in question. In this respect, we note the member completed a total of 12 combat missions while...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00413
_________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He should receive the DFC and SS with 9 battle stars based on his successful completion of 50 combat missions and since he was shot down 3 times. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR recommends denial of applicant’s request for the DFC and states, in part, that in 1946, General “Hap” Arnold ordered theater commanders not to award the AM...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01716
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01716 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect he received an Oak Leaf Cluster to the Purple Heart (PH) for being a prisoner of war (POW). DPPPR further states the applicant has not provided any documentation to show he was injured or wounded...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03794
In BC-2004-02294, the AFBCMR awarded a DFC to an applicant who had also completed more than the required ten missions as a lead navigator and an additional oak leaf cluster for completion of a tour of 32 combat missions. AFPC/DPPPR states, in part, that although the applicant’s records indicate that he completed a total of 35 combat missions and he has submitted a DFC recommendation signed by his former commander, in 1946, General “Hap” Arnold ordered theater commanders not to award the AM...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02556
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-2003-03307
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 | CY2002 | BC-2001-02836
If one member of a crew receives the DFC all members should. The AFPC/DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant states that in 1944 he and others were selected to be lead crew and would receive the DFC upon completion of 30 missions. He states that AFPC has erred in their recommendation and that he should be granted the medal as well as the recognition of a certificate.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02181
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02181 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 17 JANUARY 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect additional oak leaf clusters (OLCs) to his approved Air Medal (AM) w/ 2 OLCs and any additional unit citations for his service in World War II. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | bc-2004-01457
The applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, in the absence of official documentation to substantiate the total number of combat missions he completed, we find insufficient documentary evidence has been presented to warrant awarding him additional Air Medals. Should the applicant provide statements from other crew members who served with him on the same combat mission flights and were awarded nine AMs, the Board will reconsider his request. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-00219
In 1943, General “Hap” Arnold ordered theater commanders not to award the AM or DFC based solely on the number of combat missions completed, but rather for acts of heroism in combat flight or extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight. In this respect, the available evidence of record reflects the applicant completed a total of 35 combat missions while assigned to the Eighth Air Force as a B-17 pilot. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant’s Member of Congress, dated 23 Mar 09, w/atchs.