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:

                 Mr. Joseph A. Roj, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Member
                 Mr. William H. Anderson, 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.




                                   JOSEPH A. ROJ
                                   Panel Chair