RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02456
INDEX CODE: 107.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 7 FEBRUARY 2007
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be promoted to the grade of captain.
_________________________________________________________________
THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He flew 44 combat air missions with the B-17 “Flying Fortress” as a co-
pilot during WWII. He flew 30 missions with the 560th Bomb Squadron from 7
June 1944 to 18 August 1944 and 14 missions with the 562nd Bomb Squdron
from early December 1944 to 8 April 1945. The 388th Bomb Group Commander
told him he would be promoted to captain prior to his release from the
service.
In support of his request, applicant submits photos of himself and the
388th Bomb Group crew and a copy of his Congressional correspondence.
Applicant’s submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) has been unable to locate the
applicant’s original military records and it is presumed they were
destroyed by fire in 1973 at the NPRC in St. Louis. The following
information has been extracted from the reconstructed records provided by
the NPRC and the records provided by the applicant.
The applicant entered active duty on 5 December 1943, was assigned to duty
in the Air Corps, and was progressively promoted to the grade of first
lieutenant.
The applicant was assigned to the 388th Bomb Group, 8th Air Force, in the
European Theater of Operations as a B-17 “Flying Fortress” pilot, from 25
April 1944 through 30 June 1945, when he returned to the Continental United
States.
The applicant was honorably discharged on 7 November 1945, for the
Convenience of the Government (Demobilization). He was credited with 3
months and 25 days of continental service and 1 year, 2 months and 7 days
of foreign service. His discharge document shows he was awarded the
European-African-Middle Eastern Service Medal, the Air Medal with 1 Oak
Leaf Cluster, Distinguished Flying Cross and the Distinguished Unit
Citation.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPPR recommends the application be denied. AFPC/DPPPR states they
were unable to determine if the applicant met the eligibility requirements
for promotion to captain since they cannot verify his date of rank to first
lieutenant. In addition, they were unable to verify the applicant was ever
recommended for promotion. The AFPC/DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 27 January 2006, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was sent to the
applicant for review and comment. 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. After reviewing the evidence of record,
we are not persuaded that the applicant has been the victim of an error or
injustice. Since the record does not reveal nor has the applicant provided
any evidence showing he served in a grade higher than first lieutenant or
showing he was treated differently from other similarly situated members,
we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of
primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our
findings in the case. While we are not unappreciative of the applicant’s
accomplishments in the service of his Nation, in the absence of evidence
showing he served in a higher grade, we have no basis on which to favorably
consider his application.
_________________________________________________________________
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 Docket Number 05-02456 in
Executive Session on 9 March 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
Ms. Josephine L. Davis, Member
Mr. James A. Wolffe, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 17 Jun 05, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Record.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 18 Jan 06.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Jan 06.
CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
Panel Chair
Had he not been reassigned he would have completed a total of 35 combat missions and met the requirement for award of a DFC (i.e., completion of 35 combat missions). After a thorough review of the applicant’s submission and the supporting documentation he provided, we are not persuaded that his record should be corrected to reflect completion of 28 combat missions or that he be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC). After a thorough review of his submission and the supporting...
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states that his honorable discharge does not include the PH because the medal was mailed to his residence after his discharge. _________________________________________________________________ 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 awarded the Purple Heart...
He also completed three missions as a B-17F navigator. During World War II, the 8th Air Force had an established policy whereby a DFC was awarded upon the completion of 30 combat flight missions and an AM was awarded upon the completion of five missions. In 1944, the 8th Air Force required completion of 30 combat flight missions; however, the applicant did not complete 30 missions.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01347
On 8 December 1945, he was relieved from active duty to accept appointment as a first lieutenant, Officers’ Reserve Corps, Army of the United States. DPPPR states that there is no evidence in the decedent’s records of a recommendation for, or award of, the DFC. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the FORMER MEMBER be corrected to show that he was awarded...
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 | CY2004 | BC-2003-02015
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends the applicant’s request for award of the DFC and additional campaign credit for the Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal be denied. DPPPR recommends disapproval of the applicant’s request for award of the DFC for actions on 10 October 1944; additional campaign credit for the Asiatic- Pacific Campaign Medal; and, award of the Air Medal with fourth oak leaf cluster for the period 23...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00420
_________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: In view of his completion of a total of 37 combat missions and based on the Eighth Air Force established policy of awarding an AM upon the completion of every five heavy bomber missions and awarding a DFC upon the completion of 35 combat missions, he should be awarded the DFC and an additional AM. In view of the above, and since the applicant never received a DFC for his completion of a combat...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-00325 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His record be corrected to reflect the award of the Purple Heart, Air Medal, Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal with bronze star, and the Republic of Korean War Service Medal. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02027
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02027 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC). The applicant flew 32 combat missions as a B-24 pilot and was a prisoner of war from 31 December 1944 to 8 May 1945. THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ Chair AFBCMR 02-00931 MEMORANDUM FOR THE...
The AFPC/DPPPWB evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states that the names of the four enlisted members provided to his Congressman in a letter, dated 27 June 1947, are not his former crew members and are unknown to him. The applicant contends that he would have been promoted along with his five fellow crew members based on their completion of ten combat...