RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-02780
            INDEX CODE:  107.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to reflect:

        a.  Award of the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) and the  Air
Medal with one Oak Leaf Cluster (AM w/1 OLC).

        b.  Receive $200.00 dollars of Mustering Out Pay (MOP).

_________________________________________________________________

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.  He did not  receive  acknowledgement  of
the two German ME 109s that were shot down and turned in.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant’s military records were destroyed in the 1973  fire  at  the
National Personnel Records Center (NPRC).

The available records reveal the applicant served on active duty  from
7 April 1943 - 8 November 1945.  He was discharged  in  the  grade  of
staff sergeant for convenience of the government Demobilization.   His
WD AGO 53 - 55 reflects he was awarded the  Air  Medal  (AM),  Victory
Medal, Good Conduct  Medal  (GCM),  Overseas  Bar,  American  Theater,
European-African-Middle  Eastern  (EAME)  Campaign  Medal  with  three
Bronze Stars.  His records further reflect he  had  an  overseas  tour
from 2 January 1945 through 25 June 1945.  His WD  AGO  53-55  further
reflects the applicant was paid $100.00 of  the  $300.00  MOP  he  was
eligible to receive.

On 29 September 2004, SAF/MRBR informed the applicant that the records
needed to respond to his inquiry were not available and  requested  he
provide any documentation that he did not include with his application
in support of his request.  On 13 October 2004, the applicant provided
the names and addresses of two crewmembers.

A DD Form 215 was issued on 23 November 2004 adding  the  Presidential
Unit Citation (PUC) to the applicant’s DD Form 214.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPPR states in order for an individual to be awarded the  DFC
or the AM, the individual must provide documentation to  support  acts
of heroism or meritorious achievements while participating  in  aerial
flights in actual combat in support of operations.  The applicant  did
not provide any documentation to support  award  of  the  AM  or  DFC.
However, the applicant may pursue the DFC under the provisions of  the
1996 National Defense Authorization  Act  (NDAA).   The  timeline  for
submitting decorations is two years  from  the  date  of  the  act  or
achievement.   However,  the  Fiscal  Year   1996   National   Defense
Authorization Act ((NDAA), Section 526), which was enacted into law on
10 February 1996, waived the timeline.  The submission for  the  award
must be written and meet two criteria:  1) be made  by  someone  other
than the servicemember, in the servicemember’s chain of command at the
time of the incident, and, who had firsthand knowledge of the acts  or
achievements; and 2) be submitted through a congressional  member  who
can ask a military service to review a proposal for a decoration based
on the merits of the proposal and the award criteria in existence when
the event occurred.  AFPC/DPPPR recommends  the  requested  relief  be
denied and further  recommends  the  applicant  pursue  award  of  the
decorations under the provisions of the 1996 NDAA.

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

DFAS-POCC/DE states the applicant’s military pay records are no longer
available and they are unable to verify whether or not he received the
remaining payment of MOP.  Therefore,  they  recommend  the  requested
relief be denied.

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 3 December 2004, 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   note   of   the
documentation the applicant provided in support  of  his  request  for
award of the DFC, AM and Mustering Out Pay; however, we agree with the
opinions and recommendations of the Air Force and DFAS 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.  As noted, the applicant’s  records  were  administratively
corrected to add the PUC to his records.  Unfortunately, the  military
personnel records needed  to  process  the  applicant’s  request  were
destroyed in the 1973 fire at NPRC.  The applicant  was  requested  to
provide any documentation in support of his request; however,  he  did
not respond.  There is no evidence in the available  military  records
to substantiate his request.  Without any  official  documentation  to
support his request, his entitlement to the DFC, AM and pay cannot  be
verified.  While  we  are  not  unmindful  or  unappreciative  of  the
applicant’s service to his Nation, in the absence of the  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-
2004-02780  in  Executive  Session  on  3  February  2005  under   the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                       Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
                       Ms. Renee M. Collier, Member
                       Ms. Cheryl V. Jacobson, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 4 Sep 04, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Available Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 26 Oct 04, w/atch.
      Exhibit D. Letter, DFAS-POCC/DE, dated 9 Nov 04.
      Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Dec 04.




                             THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                             Chair