Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03276
Original file (BC-2005-03276.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                       DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-03276
                                       INDEX CODE:  107.00
      XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX                  COUNSEL: NONE

                                             HEARING DESIRED:  NO


MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  29 April 2007


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His WD AGO Form 53-55, Enlisted Record and Report of Separation -  Honorable
Discharge, be updated to reflect his entitlement to wear Air Crew wings.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He is researching his family genealogy and wants  his  military  records  to
correctly reflect his accomplishments.

In support of his application, the applicant provides a personal  statement,
copies of his military discharge documents, a card certifying his rating  as
an aircrew member, and assorted military  identification  and  qualification
cards.   The  applicant’s  complete  submission,  with  attachments,  is  at
Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

According to the limited records available, the applicant  enlisted  in  the
Enlisted Reserve Corps of the Army on 13 July 1944 at the age of 17  in  the
grade of private (E-1).  He served as a clerk typist.  On 10  January  1946,
the applicant was called to active duty and was  promoted  to  the  rank  of
private first class in March 1946.  The applicant served as  a  Supply  Non-
Commissioned Officer.

On 4 March 1947, the applicant was separated under the  provisions  of  Army
Regulation 615-365, for convenience of the government.
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AF/XOOT recommends denial of the applicant’s request.  XOOT states  although
the  documents  submitted  by  the  applicant  reflects  he  may  have  been
authorized to wear aircrew wings during the  execution  of  related  duties,
they do not indicate he was ever awarded  an  aviation  badge,  or  met  the
requirements for permanent award of the badge.  The  applicant  submitted  a
card with the rating of Air Crew on it; however, there  is  no  evidence  of
Aeronautical Orders, a flight  log,  or  any  reference  to  him  performing
aircrew duties in the submitted documentation.

The XOOT evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:


After reviewing the Air Force advisory opinion, it is apparent to  him  that
he is not qualified to wear the Air  Crew  wings.   He  received  no  formal
training  or  official  award  of  the  badge.    He   has   no   additional
documentation other than what he has already forwarded.  He was  hoping  the
Air Force had more documentation on file.  It appears his appeal is  just  a
waste of time and effort; therefore, he sees no reason to pursue  his  quest
further for so trivial a matter.  The applicant’s rebuttal is at Exhibit  E.


_________________________________________________________________

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.  The  applicant  requests  his  records  be
corrected  to  reflect  his  entitlement  to  wear  the  Air   Crew   Wings.
Notwithstanding the applicant’s statement that he sees no reason  to  pursue
his request after receiving the Air Force advisory opinion, we reviewed  the
evidence of record and the applicant’s submission;  however,  we  find  that
other than the applicant’s assertions, we have no evidence to  indicate  his
entitlement to wear the Air  Crew  Wings.   Therefore,  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 this application in  Executive
Session on 20 June 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

            Mr. Michael J. Maglio, Panel Chair
      Ms. Mary C. Puckett, Member
            Ms. Patricia R. Collins, Member

The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR  Docket  Number  BC-2005-03276
was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 Sep 05, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AF/XOOT, dated 6 Dec 05.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Apr 06.
    Exhibit E.  Applicant’s Letter, dated 14 May 06.




                                   MICHAEL J. MAGLIO
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 0001976

    Original file (0001976.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based upon an Aircrew Evaluation Board recommendation or an aircrew member's voluntary disqualification, any flying unit commander may disqualify any non-rated aircrew from aviation service. Additionally, the commander may recommend permanent disqualification and withdrawal of an aviation badge through command channels to the Major Command (MAJCOM). A complete copy of the advisory is at Exhibit C. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03579

    Original file (BC-2005-03579.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    XOOT states although he did perform combat jumps and was awarded the Vietnamese Parachutist Badge with 4 bronze stars, he was not assigned to an Air Force position requiring parachute duty. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 23 December 1965, he was awarded Air Force Jump Wings. NOVEL Panel Chair AFBCMR...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02004

    Original file (BC-2005-02004.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02004 INDEX CODE: 110.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 25 Oct 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect his entitlement to the NCO Professional Military Education (NCO PME) Graduate Ribbon and flight crew status. XOOT indicates that the applicant’s military...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03012

    Original file (BC-2005-03012.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-03012 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 4 APR 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect award of the Presidential Outstanding Unit Citation (PUC), the Korean Service Medal (KSM), and the Aviation Badge. A complete copy of the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00612

    Original file (BC-2012-00612.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Attained at least 150 hours of flying duty as an The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: USAF/A3O-AIF recommends denial of the applicant’s request for the Aircrew Member and Flight Engineer Badges indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. We note...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-01303A

    Original file (BC-2004-01303A.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 19 Aug 04, the Board considered and denied an application pertaining to the applicant, in which he requested that his records be corrected to reflect award of the Aircrew Member Badge and the addition of his C-123 flying hours to his flight records. Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit G. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00965

    Original file (BC-2004-00965.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    According to AFI 11-402, Para 8.2, Operational Support flying pertains to non-aircrew personnel required to perform temporary in-flight duties not associated with the aircraft’s primary mission. c. Applicant indicates there are personnel in the Air Force that are awarded the aircrew badge and become disqualified, never fly again, but are authorized to keep the badge. Because she did not receive all of the required training and her duties at home station are not primary aircrew, even though...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04696

    Original file (BC-2011-04696.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Air Force Outstanding Unit Award with two Bronze Service Stars (AFOUA w/2BSS) (administratively resolved). The V device for the DFC is only authorized when the medal was awarded of heroism. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-04696 in Executive Session on 26 Jun 12, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03566

    Original file (BC-2005-03566.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-03566 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 25 MAY 2007 ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Air Medal with “V” device and the Combat Aircrew Insignia. According to the evidence of record, although the applicant performed duties in an aircraft during his tour in...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00576

    Original file (BC-2006-00576.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Air Force Instruction (AFI) 11-402, Aviation Service, Aeronautical Ratings, and Badges, specifies two criteria for the award of Navigator Wings, (1) that he be a graduate of an Advanced Navigator Training School, and (2) that he have at least 400 primary navigator hours. A3OT’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF...