Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03280
Original file (BC-2005-03280.doc) Auto-classification: Denied


                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-03280
            INDEX CODE: 107.00
      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  None

      XXXXXXX    HEARING DESIRED:  No

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  28 Apr 07

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be awarded all medals to which entitled including but  not  limited
to the Presidential Unit Citation (PUC),  the  World  War  II  Victory
Medal (WWII VM), additional Air Medals (AM) beyond the 2nd   Oak  Leaf
Cluster (2OLC), the “American Defense,” and the “American Area.”

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The medals were omitted.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is  at  Exhibit
A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The AM is awarded to US and civilian  personnel  for  single  acts  of
heroism of meritorious  achievements  while  participating  in  aerial
flight and to foreign military personnel in actual combat  in  support
of operations.  Required achievement is less than  that  required  for
the  Distinguished  Flying  Cross  but  must  be   accomplished   with
distinction above and beyond that expected of professional airman.  It
is not awarded for  peace  time  sustained  operation  activities  and
flights.

The applicant enlisted in the Army Air Corps  on  8 Jan  42.   He  was
deployed to the European-African Theater on 14 Oct 44 and returned  to
the US on 29 Jun 45.  He was  honorably  discharged  (demobilized)  on
12 Sep 45 in the grade of technical sergeant after three years,  seven
months and six days of active duty.  His WD AGO Form 53-55  lists  his
entitlement to the  AM  w/2OLCs,  the  Good  Conduct  Medal,  and  the
European-African Middle Eastern Campaign Medal with One Silver Service
Star (EAMECM w/1SSS).

The applicant’s records apparently were burned in the 1973 fire at the
National Personnel Record Center (NPRC).

The applicant originally forwarded his DD Form 149, dated  17 Mar  05,
to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records, which  forwarded
his case to the AFBCMR on 18 Oct 05.

On 9 Mar 06, HQ AFPC/DPPRSP advised the applicant that his record  had
been  administratively  corrected  to  reflect  entitlement   to   the
following additional awards:  the  PUC,  the  WWII  VM,  the  American
Campaign Medal (ACM) [presumably what the applicant meant by “American
Area”], and the Army of Occupation Medal (AOM).

NOTE:  If by “American Defense” the  applicant  is  referring  to  the
American Defense Service Medal (ADSM), he would  not  be  eligible  as
that medal was awarded for active duty service completed between 8 Sep
39 and 7 Dec 41.  He did not enlist until 8 Jan 42.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends disapproval of the  applicant’s  request  for
additional OLCs to the AM due to lack of documentation, special order,
or written recommendation from a recommending  official  awarding  him
additional AMs.

A complete copy of the 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 on 17 Mar 05 for review and comment within 30 days  (Exhibit
D).  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.  The applicant’s records  already
reflected, or have since been administratively corrected  to  reflect,
entitlement to the following decorations:  the  AM  w/2OLC,  the  Good
Conduct Medal, the EAMECM w/1SSS, the PUC, the ACM, the WWII  VM,  and
the AOM.  Therefore,  the  only  issues  remaining  for  this  Board’s
consideration pertain to  the  request  for  additional  AMs  and  the
“American  Defense.”   If  by  “American  Defense”  the  applicant  is
referring to the ADSM, he would not be  eligible  as  that  medal  was
awarded for active duty service completed between 8 Sep 39  and  7 Dec
41.  The applicant has not provided any evidence to support his  claim
that he is entitled to additional  AMs  beyond  his  basic  award  and
2OLCs.  In view of the above and absent  persuasive  evidence  to  the
contrary, the  applicant  has  not  sustained  his  burden  of  having
suffered either an error or an injustice with  respect  to  these  two
decorations.  Therefore, we find  no  compelling  basis  on  which  to
recommend granting any relief beyond that already accomplished through
administrative correction.

_________________________________________________________________

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 11 May 2006 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                 Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Donna Jonkoff, Member
                 Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member

The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2005-03280 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 Mar 05, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPR, dated 19 Jan 06.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Mar 06.




                                   CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01738

    Original file (BC-2005-01738.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01738 INDEX CODE: 107.00 (Member/Uncle) COUNSEL: None (Applicant/Nephew) 063-14-5768 HEARING DESIRED: Yes MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 29 NOV 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His uncle be awarded the Silver Star (SS) [or some other fitting award - See Exhibit E] for heroic actions performed in World War II...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00172

    Original file (BC-2006-00172.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    [Note: Pursuant to an inquiry by the AFBCMR Staff, HQ AFPC/DPPPRA advised via 13 Jul 06 email that they had noted the BSM certificate provided by the applicant (Exhibit A) but as they could find no special order or other evidence in the applicant’s file that he received the basic award, they did not recommend his separation documents be administratively corrected to reflect receipt of that decoration.] In response, the applicant provided a handwritten letter with the original BSM...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00935

    Original file (BC-2006-00935.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Further without evidence to verify the applicant was recommended for the SS his request could not be favorably considered. His records do not reflect that he was recommended for, or awarded the SS. Novel, Panel Chair Mr. Reginald P. Howard, Member Mr. James A. Wolffe, Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2006-00325 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 17 Mar 06, w/atchs.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00108

    Original file (BC-2011-00108.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    By letter dated 25 May 11, HQ AFPC/DPSOAA states there is no evidence to support the applicant’s deceased grandfather enlisted rather than being inducted under the selective service system which was highly active during WWII. His date of induction is recorded in block 22 as 16 Feb 42, matching his date of entry on active duty recorded in block 24. The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 01991

    Original file (BC 2013 01991.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    NPRC records do not show he was awarded the Aerial Gunner Badge or the Aircrew Member Badge. However, he was awarded both since he completed training and served in a unit that completed combat missions. The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C. USAF/A3O-AIF recommends approval of the request for the Aircrew Member Badge.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03787

    Original file (BC-2005-03787.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The DPPPR evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 19 May 2006, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days (Exhibit D). The Board majority notes evidence has not been provided and there is no documentation in the applicant’s military personnel record, which would substantiate that the recommendation for award of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01785 ADDENDUM

    In a letter dated 5 Feb 11, the applicant requests reconsideration of his requests for the AM and PH Medal based on his belief the Board erred when making their determination the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence. As for his claim related to the PH Medal, the applicant argues that he was injured when his plane crashed and therefore should have been awarded the PH Medal. We also note Counsel’s contention the Board previously relied on these reports in granting several similar...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-02281

    Original file (BC-2012-02281.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denying the applicant’s request for the award of the BSM w/1OLC, DFC, AM, PUC w/2OLCs, Combat Infantryman Badge, and Philippine Liberation Ribbon. To grant the member award of the Combat Infantry Badge and the associated BSM w/1OLC would be contrary to the agreement between the Department of the Army and Department of the Air Force established by the Joint Army and Air...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01785

    Original file (BC-2010-01785.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Air Medal (AM). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial of the applicant’s request for the AM, PUC, and PH Medal, indicating there is no evidence of his entitlement to these awards. A thorough review of the applicant’s record revealed no...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00358

    Original file (BC-2005-00358.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    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...