RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBERS:  01-02528
		INDEX CODE 107.00
	 	COUNSEL:  None

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He and his crew be awarded an unspecified decoration for destroying enemy jet fighters during a bombing mission from Italy to Berlin, Germany, on 24 Mar 45.

[Presumably the applicant wants the Air Medal, 2nd Oak Leaf Cluster (AM 2OLC) he received in 1996 for this mission upgraded to either the Silver Star (SS) or the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) - See Statement of Facts below.]
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His crew was instrumental in earning the Presidential Unit Citation for the 483rd Bombardment Group (483BG); however, the squadron commander's staff failed to process and send forward his recommendation for personal awards for the entire "Big Yank" bomber crew for achievements during the 24 Mar 45 mission.  

The applicant includes a copy of a 1 Nov 95 letter the squadron commander sent to a congressional representative in support of an earlier appeal. The applicant also refers to two websites pertaining to the mission.

The applicant's complete submission, with attachments and printouts of the cited websites, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered active duty on 23 May 44. On 6 Feb 45, he was deployed to the Mediterranean Theater and served as a B-17 pilot assigned to the 483BG. He received a basic Air Medal (AM) on 21 Mar 45 and a second AM on 7 Apr 45 for sustained operational activities in aerial flight against the enemy during 8-13 Mar 45 and 15 Mar-15 Apr 45, respectively. 

On 24 Mar 45, the 483BG was tasked to bomb the Daimler-Benz Tank Works in Berlin, Germany.  This would be the longest mission ever undertaken by the 15th Air Force. As the 27 B-17 aircraft approached the target, a formation of 16 enemy jet aircraft pressed an aggressive attack. The pilots of the group kept formation while responding against the attacks and coming under antiaircraft fire.  Despite the attack and sustaining damage, the bomber formation made a highly successful run on the target.  The applicant's crew received credit for shooting down three enemy jets.

The applicant returned to the US on 22 Oct 45 and was released from active duty in the grade of 1st lieutenant on 13 Nov 45. He had 1 year, 5 months and 20 days of active service.

On 12 Apr 96, a Congressional representative requested that the applicant and his crew be awarded either the DFC or the SS for the 24 Mar 45 mission. This was generated in part by the 1 Nov 95 recommendation from the squadron commander (a retired brigadier general) that the applicant and crew be awarded the DFC.

On 13 Aug 96, the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) disapproved the DFC but approved the award of the AM. Special Order GB-843, dated 9 Sep 96, awarded the applicant the AM, 2nd Oak Leaf Cluster (2OLC) for meritorious achievement while participating in aerial flight on 24 Mar 45.  The navigator also received an AM 2OLC, and the radio operator received the basic AM. On 13 Sep 96, officials forwarded the award elements for these three to the representative's office for presentation. 

In Mar-Apr 01, the applicant again appealed through congressional representatives for either the SS or DFC for the 24 Mar 45 mission. On 7 Nov 01, the Secretary of the Air Force Legislative Liaison (SAFLLI) advised one of the representatives that the applicant had already received the AM in Aug 96 for this specific achievement and award of the SS or the DFC would constitute dual recognition.

On 15 Nov 01, HQ AFPC/DPPPRA also advised the applicant that, since he had already received the AM 2OLC for this mission, the SS or the DFC would constitute dual recognition.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPPR notes that SAFPC determined in 1996 that the crew's accomplishments on 24 Mar 45 merited award of the AM, not the SS or the DFC. The applicant has already received a decoration for those achievements and cannot be awarded another decoration for the same accomplishments.  Therefore, he is not eligible for award of any additional decorations. Denial is recommended.

A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 15 Feb 02 for review and comment 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 probable error or injustice.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that he is entitled to the SS or DFC for the 24 Mar 45 mission. Contrary to the applicant's allegations, he was in fact awarded an individual medal for his achievements on that date.  On 9 Sep 96, the SAFPC concluded that his actions merited the AM 2OLC, but not the SS or the DFC.  The navigator and radio operator also were awarded individual medals for that mission.  The applicant cannot receive dual decorations for the same feat, and he has provided no additional or persuasive evidence to warrant upgrading the AM 2OLC he already received. The applicant has failed to sustain his burden of having suffered either an error or an injustice and, absent persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of probable 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 21 March 2002 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
               Panel Chair
			Member
			Member

The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number 01-02528 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 Sep 01, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPR, dated 8 Feb 02, w/atch.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Feb 02.