RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-00150
		INDEX CODE:  128.06
		COUNSEL:  None

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be awarded the Silver Star Medal (SSM) for his actions on 27 May 1944 as a combat infantryman. 

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Every place in the Air Corps has refused to accept his papers for award of the SSM.  After 30 years he met up with former officers who knew of the SSM recommendation and who thought he had since been awarded the SSM.  

In support of his appeal, applicant submits a personal statement detailing an account of events in New Guinea, a copy of his discharge and a supportive statement from the First Sergeant of Headquarters Company 1st Battalion.  

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) in St. Louis has been unable to locate the applicant’s original military records and it is presumed they were destroyed by fire in 1973.  

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the available information, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPR recommends the application be denied.  DPPPR states that the Army had processed the applicant’s first request for award of the SSM and the Army Review Board had downgraded it to a Bronze Star Medal (BSM).  DPPPR states that the Army agreed that the applicant should have received the basic BSM for the Combat Infantryman’s Badge and the BSM with First Oak Leaf Cluster for his actions on 27 May 1944.  DPPPR states it is not clear why the Army processed the applicant’s first request for award of the SSM, awarded the BSM and did not place documents in the applicant’s records for future reference.  DPPPR further states that the fact remains that the applicant has again requested award of the SSM for his actions on 27 May 1944 and they don’t believe the Air Force should usurp the Army’s position and decision.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 10 May 2002 for review and response within 30 days.  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.  Applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, the Board finds no evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly reviewing the documentation that has been submitted in support of applicant’s appeal, we do not believe he has suffered from an injustice.  Applicant’s contentions have been adequately addressed by the appropriate Air Force office and we agree with their comments and recommendation and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  We note that the Army Board for Correction of Military Records has reviewed applicant’s request for a Silver Star Medal and determined that the award of a Bronze Star Medal was more appropriate.  We do not believe it is appropriate to reconsider the determination of the Army’s Board in this matter, particularly since it relates to the service of the applicant while in an Army infantry component, prior to his transfer to the Army Air Forces.  Therefore, we find no 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 26 June 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 26 October 2001 w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 4 April 2002 w/atchs.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 May 2002.