SECOND ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-01531
INDEX CODE: 100.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
In the applicant’s request for reconsideration, he requests he be given
credit for two enemy aircraft shot down on 1 January 1945.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
In an application to the Board dated 15 April 2002, the applicant requested
he be given credit for two enemy aircraft shot down on 1 January 1945. On
20 June 2002, the Board considered and denied the applicant’s request. A
complete copy of the Record of Proceedings (ROP) is at Exhibit K.
On 26 April 2004, the president of the Eighth Air Force Historical Society
submitted a letter in behalf of the applicant for reconsideration. He
states members of the Board of Directors of the Eighth Air Force Historical
Society have reviewed the records of the applicant’s efforts to establish
credit for the destruction of an enemy aircraft, an ME-109 German fighter,
during a historic air battle at Asch, Belgium on 1 January 1945. They
believe the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) has
treated the applicant’s request with what appears to be rather cavalier
interest. This event is one of the most important moments in the
applicant’s life, a feat of battle that has been documented in Army Air
Force orders and countless histories of World War II air battles, the
engagement of the 487th Fighter Squadron of the 352nd Fighter Group in
Belgium on 1 January 1945. The applicant has their respect and they
believe he is worthy of a credible response to his request from the Board.
They support his effort to receive credit for a fourth aerial victory on 1
January 1945 (Exhibit L).
On 28 June 2004, the AFBCMR considered and denied the applicant’s request
for reconsideration. The Addendum to the Record of Proceedings (ROP) with
attachments is at Exhibit M.
In a letter dated 10 December 2005, the applicant again requested
reconsideration of his application (Exhibit N).
On 23 January 2006, the Board staff examined the applicant’s request and
determined his submission contained the same request which was previously
considered and denied by the Board, and he provided no new evidence and it
did not meet the criteria for reconsideration by the Board. His request
was denied (Exhibit O).
In correspondence submitted through the applicant’s Congressman, the
applicant requests reconsideration of his application (Exhibit P).
_________________________________________________________________
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD:
After again considering the applicant's request and his most recent
submission, we are still not persuaded that the requested corrective action
is warranted. The documentation submitted with the applicant’s request for
reconsideration is duly noted. However, it does not sufficiently persuade
us to override the determination made by the 8th Air Force and the IX
Tactical Air Force Aerial Victory Credit Boards vested with discretionary
authority to render determination regarding aerial credit, as well as this
Board’s previous determination regarding this matter. Therefore, we are
not compelled to favorably grant the relief sought. We would emphasize,
however, that our decision in no way diminishes the significance of the
applicant’s unselfish performance during a dangerous period in our nation’s
history. We commend his bravery and hope he takes pride in the
contributions he made in protecting our country.
_________________________________________________________________
DECISION OF THE BOARD:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate
the existence of an error or injustice; the application was denied without
a personal appearance; and 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 2 October 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
Mr. James W. Russell III, Member
Mr. John E. B. Smith, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2002-01531 was considered:
Exhibit M. Addendum to Record of Proceedings,
dated 20 Jul 04, w/atchs.
Exhibit N. Letter, Applicant, dated 10 Dec 05, w/atchs.
Exhibit O. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 23 Jan 06.
Exhibit P. Letter, Applicant, dated 11 Jan 06, w/atchs.
RICHARD A. PETERSON
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2002-01531A
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-01531 INDEX CODE: 100.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: In the applicant’s request for reconsideration, he requests he be given credit for two enemy aircraft shot down on 1 January 1945. On 20 June 2002, the Board considered and denied the applicant’s request. He states...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01531
The Agency, in contrast, has reviewed all official documentation it can find that is relevant to the Asch dogfight and concluded that contemporary authorities correctly awarded one of seven pilots the ME-109 aerial victory credit now claimed by the applicant. However, it appears that shortly after the 1 January 1945 battle, the --- Air Force and the IX Tactical Air Force Aerial Victory Credit Boards reviewed the events of that day and, based upon official intelligence and operational...
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant's military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force (Exhibit C). For the Korean War, the Air Force Historical Research Agency requires a Far East Air Forces (FEAF) general order, or documentation on which such an order would be based, to confirm official award of an aerial...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2002-02730a
ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02730 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: TOM DRAKE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Purple Heart (PH) and the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC). In this respect, we note the Board previously denied his request for award of the DFC based on the absence of evidence that he completed a total...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-00885
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00885 INDEX CODE: 100.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The credit for a Mikoyan-Gurevich (MiG-15) “Probably Destroyed” in aerial combat in Korea on 21 September 1952, be upgraded to a “Confirmed Destroyed.” ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT...
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 | CY2003 | BC-2003-00520
On 25 January 1980, the applicant submitted an application requesting that his records be corrected to show that he was promoted to the grade of captain in November 1943; and that he received Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) for flying more than 25 missions during the period in question. This evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 9 October 2003, a copy of the Air Force...
In support of the appeal, applicant submits a copy of his WD AGO Form 53-55 and a Letter of Recommendation, dated 29 May 1944, indicating that he completed a total of 25 combat missions and was awarded the DFC and AM, 3 OLC. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states that at the time he completed a total of 25 combat missions a member would be awarded a DFC and upon completion of every five combat...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-1997-01417A
On 12 December 1945, in response to applicant’s letter of 20 October 1945, the Awards and Decorations Officer, Headquarters Far East Air Forces, informed the applicant that the 24 August 1945 recommendation for the DFC had been disapproved; instead, he received the fifth oak leaf cluster to the Air Medal for operational missions between 27 February and 2 July 1945. The complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-01826
In support of his request, the applicant submits his personal statement, Congressional correspondence, recommendations from his former commander/Director of Combat Operations Fifth Air Force, narrative recommendations, proposed citations, a statement from his wingman on the 28 June 1952 mission, extracts from his personal copies of his military records to include flight records, mission reports, a copy of the only other DSC awarded in the wing, translated Russian mission reports for...