RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2016-03344

XXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL: NONE

	HEARING: YES

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to reflect award of the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) and award of a fourth Air Medal (AM).

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His flight record was over looked upon his separation from the service.  Ordinarily, he would have been awarded the DFC for his full tour of 26 missions as First Pilot of a combat crew.  His superiors were too busy at the time to be worried about combat awards.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 30 Oct 45, the applicant was received an honorable discharge.  For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisories at Exhibit C, Exhibit D, and Exhibit E.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFHRA/RS recommends partially granting the application for the third Oak Leaf Cluster to the AM, however recommends denial for the DFC.  The applicant’s records reflect 24 combat missions; he should have an AM with three oak leaf clusters.  In 1945, Eighth Air Force award policy for the AM was that for every six combat missions, an AM would be bestowed.  The first six missions resulted in the basic AM and for every six more combat missions completed, an oak leaf cluster would be added to the individuals AM.  An end of tour DFC award was that a bomber crewmember had to participate in 30 combat missions before being considered as completing a combat tour.  Since the applicant had completed 24 (or 25) combat missions, he did not meet the criteria completing a combat tour and therefore not eligible for consideration for a DFC based on sustained record of exceptionally outstanding performance of duty as to clearly set him apart from his comrades who have not been so recognized.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit C.

SAF/MRBP recommends partially granting the application for the third Oak Leaf Cluster to the AM; however, recommends denial for the DFC concurring with the opinion of AFHRA/RS.  The applicant’s service records reflect that his participation in the 1 Mar 45 mission met the criteria to be awarded the AM per the 94th Combat Bombardment Wing’s Standard Operating Procedures dated 7 Jan 45.  After reviewing the service records provided by the applicant and the AFHRA, the applicant did not meet the minimum requirements of completing 30 missions to be awarded the DFC.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit D.

AFPC/DP3SP recommends disapproval for award of the DFC and the AM as no official documentation verifying the applicant was recommended for or awarded the DFC or the AM.  In order for the applicant’s request to be reasonably considered, the following information is required for each award; a signed recommendation from someone with firsthand knowledge of the act/achievement, a proposed citation, and eyewitness statements.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit E.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Board sent a copy of the Air Force evaluation to the applicant on 16 Jul 18 for comment (Exhibit F), but has received no response.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The application was not timely filed, but it is in the interest of justice to excuse the delay.

2.  The applicant exhausted all available avenues of non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.  After reviewing all Exhibits, the Board agrees with the recommendations of  AFHRA/RS and SAF/MRBP and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for their decision that the applicant has been the victim of either an error or an injustice.  Therefore, the Board recommends the applicant’s records be corrected to award the third Oak Leaf Cluster to his AM.  However, the Board did not find sufficient evidence of an error or injustice to warrant awarding the applicant the DFC.  Therefore, the Board recommends correcting the applicant’s records to the extent indicated below.

4.  The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to the Board’s understanding of the issues involved.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that he was awarded the Air Medal third Oak Leaf Cluster for meritorious achievement while participating in aerial flight 1 Mar 45. 

However, regarding the remainder of the applicant’s request, the Board recommends the applicant be informed the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice and the application could only be reconsidered upon receipt of relevant evidence not already considered by the Board.

The application was adjudicated without a personal appearance.

CERTIFICATION:

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2016-03344 in Executive Session on 05 Sep 18:

, Panel Chair
, Panel Member
, Panel Member

The panel voted to correct the record as recommended.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 13 Aug 16.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion, AFHRA/RS, w/atchs, dated 16 Nov 17.
Exhibit D:	Advisory opinion, SAF/MRBP, dated 31 Jan 18.
Exhibit E:	Advisory opinion, AFPC/DP1SSP, dated 13 Mar 18.
Exhibit F:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 16 Jul 18.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.