RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-03677
		INDEX CODE:  107.00
 		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her father’s records be corrected to show he was awarded the Bronze Star Medal.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The letter recommending award of the Bronze Star Medal was completed shortly after D-Day, but the paper work was never processed, or in time, for the award to be issued prior to demobilization.

In support of her request, the applicant submits a copy of the member’s Honorable Discharge Certificate, a copy of WG AFO Form 53-55, Enlisted Record and Report of Separation, Honorable Discharge, a copy of a letter for Recommendation for the Bronze Star Medal, a copy of his Certificate of Death, and copies of background information. 

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The former member’s military personnel records were destroyed by fire in 1973.  The available records reflect the member enlisted in the Army Air Corps on 16 June 1942, and separated on 15 October 1945.  Member’s records show he served during World War II, with a tour in Scotland from 8 February 1944 to 26 September 1945.  He served 3 years, 8 month and 16 days of active military service.

His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, reflects award of the Air Force Good Conduct Medal, the Distinguished Unit Badge, and the European African Middle Eastern Service Medal, with 6 Bronze Service Stars.  On 29 January 2004, his DD Form 214 was administratively corrected to reflect award of the Distinguished Unit Citation w/1 Oak Leaf Cluster, the American Campaign Medal, and the World War II Victory Medal.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The AFPC/DPPPR recommends denial of the applicant’s request for award of the Bronze Star Medal.  The applicant was informed that there was no indication in her father’s records that the proposed recommendation she provided had been submitted into official channels or even prepared.  The document provided by the applicant was a request for consideration, not a recommendation package.  Therefore, his eligibility for award of the Bronze Star Medal cannot be verified.

The DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant states that there is some information not previously submitted.  It is unknown whether there was additional paperwork in her father’s records, since they were destroyed by fire in 1973 at the records center.  The applicant’s father told her son what happened prior to giving him the letter of recommendation for award of the Bronze Star Medal along with all of his decorations, and saved paperwork shortly before he died.  Captain__________told her father that once the process of going home was initiated, the paperwork for award issuance wouldn’t go through in time because of delays due to the ongoing war.  So, Captain__________handed him the letter and told him to hold on to it.  Whether or not that was good advice or proper procedure at the time is a moot point now.  Clearly, Captain _________thought highly enough of his efforts that he sat down shortly after D-Day and crafted up a letter with the sole purpose of recognizing one of his men, because he believed that her father is deserving of some official recognition for his untiring efforts.  Clearly one major contribution had already been formally submitted and approved as indicated in the letter by Captain__________.  Her father’s modification of the M-6 Gun Mount was approved by IX Bomber Command.  This plainly indicates that contact up the chain of command had already been initiated.  This contribution and the multiple other contributions were not trivial.  The value of these contributions at any point in time, let alone during perhaps the most important battle in American history, would clearly not have gone unrecognized.  The award criteria in place at the time bear witness to his statement.  The Air Force clearly benefited and even implemented key electrical and safety modifications developed by her father, but are now 60 years later, apparently not recognizing the fact that these contributions are worthy of some form of recognition because of the paperwork problems that occurred during WWII.

Her complete submission is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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 to warrant awarding the Bronze Star Medal (BSM).  In this respect, we note the BSM is awarded for heroism, meritorious achievement, or service, not involving participation in aerial flight, in connection with military operations against an armed enemy.  In support of her request that her late father’s records be corrected to show that he was awarded the BSM, she submits an unsigned, proposed BSM recommendation, dated 18 July 1944.  The personal sacrifice the applicant’s father endured for his country is noted and our decision in no way diminishes the high regard we have for his service; however, insufficient documentary evidence has been presented to demonstrate he met the criteria for the BSM.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis upon which to warrant awarding the BSM.

4.	Notwithstanding the above, we do find sufficient relevant evidence to warrant awarding the Army Commendation Medal.  During World War II, the member served as a Power Turret and Gun Sight Mechanic, with the XXXth Bombardment Squadron, during which time, his serviced aircraft completed 60 combat missions without an armament malfunction.  In addition, based on his suggestions, significant safety modifications were made to the M-6 Gun Mount electrical system and he ingeniously improvised an electrical bomb hoist from an electric turret motor which expedited the bomb loading of aircraft.  In view of his meritorious service during the period 8 February 1944 through 26 September 1945, we recommend his records be corrected to the extent indicated below.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 1 October 1945 he was awarded the Army Commendation Medal for meritorious service during the period 8 February 1944 through 26 September 1945.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2003-03677 in Executive Session on 30 March 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

All members voted to correct the record, as recommended.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 25 Oct 03, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Fire Related Documents.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 28 Jan 04, w/atchs.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Feb 04.
	Exhibit E	Letter, Applicant, dated 14 Jan 2003.

	

AFBCMR BC-2003-03677

MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF

	Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 1 October 1945, he was awarded the Army Commendation Medal for meritorious service during the period 8 February 1944 through 26 September 1945.