RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 19 OCTOBER 2005
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20050001118
I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.
Mr. Carl W. S. Chun
Director
Ms. Deborah L. Brantley
Senior Analyst
The following members, a quorum, were present:
Ms. Barbara Ellis
Chairperson
Mr. Hubert Fry
Member
Mr. Robert Rogers
Member
The Board considered the following evidence:
Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.
Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any).
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests that the second entry in item 12 (military occupational specialty) on his War Department Adjutant General Office (WD AGO) Form 100 (Separation Qualification Record) be corrected to show Aircraft Gunner vice "Aeruak gybber."
2. The applicant states the entry is an obvious typing error and should be corrected.
3. The applicant provides a copy of the separation qualification record.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice which occurred on 28 July 1946. The application submitted in this case is dated
13 January 2005.
2. Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines that it would be in the interest of justice to do so. In this case, the ABCMR will conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicants failure to timely file.
3. The applicants military records are not available to the Board for review. A fire destroyed approximately 18 million service members records at the National Personnel Records Center in 1973. It is believed that the applicants records were lost or destroyed in that fire. However, there were sufficient documents remaining in a reconstructed record for the Board to conduct a fair and impartial review of this case.
4. The applicant's separation qualification record indicates he served on active duty between 31 July 1944 and 28 July 1946.
5. The second entry in item 12 on the separation qualification record contains the typed entry "Aeruak gybber" associated with specialty 611. A review of World War II specialty designators confirms that the correct title for specialty 611 was "Aerial gunner." The incorrect entry on the applicant's form was created by the individual who prepared the form misaligning his right hand one key to the left while typing the entry thus causing the typographic error on the form.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
While the applicant is correct that the second entry on his separation qualification record does contain a typographic error, the correct title for specialty 611 is "Aerial gunner" and not "Aircraft Gunner." It would be appropriate to correct the typographic error to show the correct specialty title.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
__BE ___ ___HF __ ___RR __ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
1. The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief and to excuse failure to timely file. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by issuing an appropriate document showing the second entry in item 12 on his separation qualification record to show "Aerial gunner" vice "Aeruak gybber."
2. The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief. As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to showing the title of his 611 specialty as "Aircraft gunner."
______Barbara Ellis_________
CHAIRPERSON
INDEX
CASE ID
AR20050001118
SUFFIX
RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
20051019
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE
YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR . . . . .
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION
PARTIAL GRANT
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1.
110.00
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001118C070206
Robert Rogers | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant’s military records are not available to the Board for review. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: While the applicant is correct that the second entry on his separation qualification record does contain a typographic error, the correct title for specialty 611 is "Aerial gunner" and not "Aircraft Gunner."
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003088751C070403
The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show his military occupational specialty (MOS) as 11B4PQ (Paratrooper/Redeye Missiles). Paragraph 2-46 of Army Regulation 600-200 states that the awarded SQI will be recorded in item 22 of the Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20). The evidence of record shows the applicant successfully completed basic airborne training and was awarded SQI "P."
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004439C070206
The applicant’s military records are not available to the Board for review. Item 31 (Military Qualification and Date) does not show award of the Combat Infantryman Badge. His Separation Qualification Record shows he served as a cook during the last 8 months of service (around July 1945 to March 1946) and he did not receive combat infantry pay.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01538
Therefore, the following information has been extracted from the documentation provided by applicant. Regardless, although the Eighth Air Force had an established policy from 1942 to 1944, whereby a DFC was awarded upon the completion of 25 heavy bomber missions, in 1944, the total number of missions for award of a DFC was increased from 25 to 35. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2004-01538 in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004548C070206
He indicates that stock clerks were not in the battles, nor were they awarded the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB). The applicant’s military records are not available to the Board for review. Although, the MOS title and number listed on the applicant’s separation document indicates he was a Stock Clerk, the rest of the available evidence all supports the applicant’s contention that he served as an infantry Rifleman during his World War II service.
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-03898
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial, noting there are no special order, recommendation, proposed citation, or any other evidence provided by the applicant or located within his limited official military personnel file to support that he was submitted for the AM. All military decorations require a recommendation from a recommending official within the member’s chain of command at the time of the act or...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003083796C070212
However, the Board notes that the letters supporting the applicant’s awards were rendered years after the fact, and, with the exception of the recommendation for award of the Bronze Star Medal, are not supported by any evidence that the applicant was recommended for, or awarded any of those decorations. The Board concludes, based on the information contained in the November 1967 recommendation, that the applicant’s voluntary performance of flight duties was intended to support his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060002424C070205
The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or Discharge) for the period ending 26 August 1968 to show a second award of the Air Medal with “V” Device, the Good Conduct Medal, and the Aviation Badge (formerly known as the Aircraft Crew Member Badge). Evidence of record shows the applicant received 18 awards of the Air Medal. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a....
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002080050C070215
There are no orders in the applicant’s service personnel records which show that he was awarded the Purple Heart. Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Military Awards), in effect at the time of the applicant's service, provided that the Purple Heart is awarded for a wound sustained as a result of hostile action. However, the DA Form 1051 was not signed by a medical officer and it does not indicate that the applicant was a battle casualty or that his injury was the result of hostile actions or...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070012289
Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time, provides that the Good Conduct Medal is awarded to individuals who have completed a qualified period of active duty enlisted service. Evidence of record shows that the applicant was assigned to a unit that was awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. awarding the applicant the Combat...