RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:				DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2009-00777
      COUNSEL: NONE
								HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

His records be corrected to reflect his award of the Air Medal (AM), Presidential Unit Citation (PUC), and the European-African-Mideast Campaign Medal with six Bronze Service Stars (EAMCM w/6 BSS).  
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was recommended for award of the AM for participating on six flying missions while assigned to the 730th Bomb Squadron (BS), England, from 1 January 1944 to 23 May 1945.  The AM was awarded routinely for five missions by the 730 BS during this inclusive period.  He was informed his records were destroyed in the 1973 fire at the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC).  He is 90 years old and would like to leave a few mementos of his service to his family.  

In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his correspondence to the NPRC to obtain his records and a 452nd Bomb Group Association Newsletter.  

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is a former member of the Army Air Corps who served in the European Theater of Operation from 4 January 1944 to 22 May 1945 as a Squadron Engineering Officer, B-17.  He participated in the Air Offensive Europe, Normandy, Northern France, Ardennes, Rhineland, and Central Europe campaigns.  His WD AGO Form 53, Military Record and Report of Separation Certificate of Service, reflects he was awarded the EAMCM w/6 BSS and three Overseas Bars.  

During World War II, 8th Air Force had established a policy whereby an AM was awarded upon the completion of every five heavy bomber missions.  

On 31 March 2009, AFPC/DPSIDR, informed the applicant they were able to verify his entitlement to the Bronze Star Medal (BSM), PUC, EAMCM w/6 BSS, and World War II Victory Medal (WWIIVM).  DPSIDR indicated his record would be administratively corrected to reflect these awards.  

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIDR recommends disapproval of the applicant’s request for award of the AM.  DPSIDR states there is no Special Order, recommendation, proposed citation or any other evidence provided by the applicant or located within his official military personnel file to support he was submitted for award of the AM.  Additionally, there was no documentation provided or located to support his participation in aerial flights, or his assignment to flight duty.  

DPSIDR indicates the requirements for award of the AM changed dramatically in the middle of World War II (WW II).  Early in 1943, while visiting the various combat theaters, General Hap Arnold expressed his concerns with the large number of AMs being awarded.  Under policy existing prior to 14 August 1943, the AM was awarded on the basis of the number of hours or missions completed.  General Arnold believed this so-called “score card” basis lessened the value of the AM and create a negative morale factor.  To correct this situation, it was decided by General Arnold that the “score card” basis for awarding the AM to be discontinued.  On 14 August 1943, General Arnold sent a memorandum to all Theater Commanders which revised the policy for award of the AM.  Under the revised policy, the AM could be awarded for single acts of heroism or meritorious achievements while participating in aerial flight.  Required achievement is less than than required for the Distinguished Flying Cross, but must be accomplished with distinction above and beyond that expected of professional airmen.  

The complete DPSIDR evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

He is disappointed and annoyed because of the pessimistic approach taken by DPSIDR in reviewing his request for the decorations he earned during WW II.  To his knowledge, all of the pilots he flew with were either killed or have since died.  While General Hap Arnold may have well revised the policy, 8th Air Force, under General Dolittle, awarded an AM to every Flight Crew or “Ground Pounder” who flew five combat missions and an Oak Leaf Cluster for each additional five combat missions.  If, in fact his records were destroyed in the fire at the NPRC, then it’s not surprising the advisory writer didn’t find an AM recommendation.  The applicant provides two loading lists from his earliest missions and a copy of an article from the Group Public Relations Officer released to his hometown newspaper.  

_________________________________________________________________

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 note the applicant’s award of the EAMCM w/6 BSS is already reflected on his DD Form 214; therefore, that portion of his request does not require a correction to his record. Furthermore, AFPC has administratively corrected the applicant’s reconstructed military records to reflect his award of the PUC, in addition to the WWIIVM and BSM; therefore, we will only address his request for award of the AM.  We note the applicant’s records were destroyed by a 1973 fire at the National Personnel Records Center in St. Louis, Missouri.  Therefore, we must consider this application based on the documentation submitted by the applicant.  The 452nd Bomb Group Newsletter, dated 1 December 2008, is duly noted; however, this in and of itself does not substantiate his entitlement to the AM.  While we are in no way questioning the applicant’s recollection of his aerial accomplishments, in the absence of official documentation indicating the total number of combat missions he completed, we find no evidence to support his contention that he flew on six combat missions during WW II.  The personal sacrifice the applicant endured for his country is noted and the recommendation to deny the requested relief in no way diminishes the high regard we have for his service.  Nevertheless, in view of the above, we find no basis to favorably consider that portion of his appeal. 

_________________________________________________________________

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 1 July 2009, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2008-03239:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Feb 09, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, ARPC/DPSIDR, dated 27 Mar 09.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Apr 09.
	Exhibit E.  Applicant’s Rebuttal, dated 3 May 09.




					
								Panel Chair
4


3