RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 04-00170
INDEX NUMBER: 128.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He receive pay for a period of time in December 1944.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
In December 1944, he was flying with the 376 Heavy Bomber Group when
his crew was told to return to the United States. They left Naples,
Italy leaving everything behind to include their pay for the month of
December. All the enlisted men on his crew were "redlined" on the
payroll. Since then he has been unsuccessful in obtaining his pay.
He is 84 years old and in bad health. He's been in the hospital six
times in the last year and a half and almost broke.
In support of his appeal, applicant provides a personal statement, a
copy of his Enlisted Record and Report of Separation and discharge
certificate. A copy of the applicant's submission, with attachments,
is attached at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant’s records were lost of destroyed. The following
information was extracted from documents supplied by the applicant.
The applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States Air
Corps on 7 June 1941 and performed duties as an armorer gunner. The
applicant was honorably discharged in the grade of staff sergeant on
24 September 1945, for the Convenience of the Government
(Demobilization). He was credited with 3 years, 9 months and 24 days
of continental service and 5 months and 24 days of foreign service.
His discharge document shows he participated in the Naples-Foggia,
Rome-Arno, Rhineland, North Apennines, Air Combat Balkans and Southern
France campaigns. He was awarded the Air Medal with three Oak Leaf
Clusters, European-African-Middle Eastern Service Medal, the Good
Conduct Medal and the American Defense Service Medal.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
DFAS-POCC/DE recommends the application be denied. DFAS-POCC/DE
states that the applicant's pay records are no longer available from
1944 to verify whether or not he received his pay. A copy of the
evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 6 February 2004, a copy of the DFAS-POCC/DE evaluation was
forwarded to the applicant for review and response. As of this date,
this office has not received a 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 and
do not find that it supports a determination that the applicant should
be paid for an undetermined period of time in December 1944. Other
than his own assertions, the applicant has provided no evidence
showing he and his crew were “redlined” for pay. We are mindful of
the fact that more than 50 years has elapsed since this incident;
however, without more expansive information pertaining to his pay,
which would lend support to his assertions that he was not paid, we
are not inclined to favorably consider his request. However, should
the applicant obtain information regarding his pay or assignments
during that time, he may, of course, request reconsideration of this
application and we would review this new evidence.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of probable 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 in
Executive Session on 11 March 2004 and 12 April 2004, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
Ms. Renee M. Collier, Member
Mr. Joseph D. Yount, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 3 Dec 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, DFAS-POCC/DE, dated 28 Jan 04.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Feb 04.
MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03818
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005- 03818 INDEX CODE: 128.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 18 JUNE 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He receive all back pay and compensation from the date of his discharge, 29 Jan 73. He is requesting basic pay and back compensation due him after 29 Jan 73, not prior to 29 Jan 73. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00959
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00959 INDEX CODES: 121.02, 128.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be paid for her accrued leave and any pay and allowances to which she was entitled at the time of her discharge. Since these records no longer exist for the time period in question, they are not able to verify whether...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02780
_________________________________________________________________ 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 | CY2003 | BC-2002-04043
He inquired again about the debt and this time he was told it was invalid and that the accounting and finance representative would notify the Defense Accounting and Finance Service (DFAS). _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 6 January 2003, he applied for a waiver of his indebtedness incurred as a result of overpayment...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | bc-2004-02294
During the period in question, he was told by a major at base headquarters that upon returning stateside, he would receive the DFC for his completion of a tour of 32 combat missions and an oak leaf cluster to the DFC for his completion of 14 lead missions. Under the revised policy, the DFC could be awarded for acts of heroism in combat flight or extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight. In view of this statement, and given the total number of missions the applicant...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01298
During this timeframe, DFAS informed the MPF the applicant could not receive a 2002 TSP payment since his request for a bonus to be distributed in TSP was not established until 2003. The applicant requests a CSB installment payment in the amount of $10,000 be applied retroactively to his TSP account effective 23 Oct 02, along with any interest he may have accrued. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2001-00580A
The applicant’s complete review is at Exhibit K. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL HQ USAF/JAA EVALUATION: HQ USAF/JAA reiterates that the applicant’s original debt of $50,669.90 was reduced to $25,669.90 and, to the extent that his reconsideration request was for the repayment of this validly established debt owed to the US, it should be denied. DFAS summarizes the applicant’s indebtedness and adjustments thereto as follows: $50,669.90 Original...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00372
Therefore, the facts surrounding his Air Force military service cannot be verified. He entered active duty on 1 June 1944 and was assigned to duties in the Air Corps. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 1 June 1945, he was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross for heroism while participating as a member of an aircrew...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01548
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-01548 INDEX NUMBER: 107.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: ROBERT L. ASTON HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 13 November 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded two oak leaf clusters to the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) and three additional oak leaf clusters to the Air Medal (AM). In view of the above,...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2000-00961-2
A summary of the evidence considered and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board is set forth in the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit F. On 10 January 2002, in response to a congressional inquiry, in behalf of the applicant, the AFBCMR denied the applicant’s request for reconsideration of her application (Refer to Exhibit G). To support this assertion, the applicant provided a personal statement, a statement from a Forensic Investigator who opines that the signature on the letter...