RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  01-02032
            INDEX CODE:  107.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be awarded the Presidential Unit Citation (PUC).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His unit was awarded the Presidential Unit  Citation,  but  he  was  wounded
before he received the award.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a WD  AGO  Form  53-55  and
other documentation.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The relevant facts  pertaining  to  this  application,  extracted  from  the
applicant's military records, are contained in the letter  prepared  by  the
appropriate office of the Air Force (Exhibit C).

The applicant’s DD Form 214 has been administratively corrected to  add  the
following awards:  The American Campaign Medal and the World War II  Victory
Medal.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPR recommended denial.  They indicated that the  applicant’s  Report
of  Separation  reflects  award  of  the   European-African-Middle   Eastern
Campaign Medal with 3 Bronze Service Stars (should be 4), Purple Heart,  and
Good Conduct Medal.  It should also reflect award of the  American  Campaign
Medal and World War II Victory Medal, and these have been added.

On 19 December 2001, this office informed the applicant that his unit,  they
786th Bomb Squadron, did not receive any  unit  awards,  and  asked  him  to
withdraw his application.  He did not respond.

The evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 8 March 2002, a copy of the Air Force evaluation  was  forwarded  to  the
applicant for review and response within  thirty  (30)  days.   As  of  this
date, no response has been received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPR recommended  denial.   They  indicated  that  confusion  resulted
because of the question about unit  awards,  specifically  the  Presidential
Unit Citation [then Distinguished Unit Citation].

Applicant’s records  were  destroyed  in  the  1973  fire  in  the  National
Personnel Records Center.  His Report of Separation shows  that  he  was  in
the Army of the United States, in the Air Corps.  It also reflects award  of
the Combat Infantryman Badge, and shows his Military Occupational  Specialty
as Rifleman.

DA Pamphlet 672-1, Unit Citation  Campaign  Participation  Credit  Register,
July 1961, shows that  certain  elements  of  the  357th  Infantry  Regiment
earned the Meritorious Unit Citation (not the Distinguished Unit  Citation),
but  only  the  headquarters  company,   specific   battalion   headquarters
companies, and the medical detachment.

The applicant has  not  provided  any  documentation  showing  that  he  was
assigned to the 357th Infantry Regiment of the 90th  Infantry  Division,  or
any of  its  subordinate  units,  even  after  being  requested  to  do  so.
Therefore, in view of the fact that he has no official  records  showing  he
was assigned to this infantry unit, only to the 786th Bombardment  Squadron,
they can not verify his eligibility for the Presidential  Unit  Citation  or
the Meritorious Unit Citation.  They can not, at  this  late  date,  explain
the discrepancies on the applicant’s Report of  Separation,  i.e.,  Infantry
vs. Air Corps.

The evaluation is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________



APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL EVALUATION:

On 6 & 10 May  2002,  a  copy  of  the  evaluation,  with  attachments,  was
forwarded to the applicant  and  counsel  for  review  and  response  within
thirty (30) days.  As of this date, no response has been  received  by  this
office.

_________________________________________________________________

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 an error or an injustice warranting award of  the  Presidential
Unit Citation (PUC).  We took notice of the applicant's complete  submission
in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with  the  opinion  and
recommendation of the Air Force and adopt their rationale as the  basis  for
our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or  an
injustice.  The applicant indicated on his DD Form 149 that he was  assigned
to  the  357th  Infantry,  90th  Division;  however,  his  military  records
indicate that he was apart of the 786th Squadron  466th  Bombardment  Group,
Army Air Force, and this  group  did  not  earn  any  unit  awards.   On  19
December  2001,  the  applicant  was  informed  of   this   information   by
AFPC/DPPPRA.  Further, we note  that  AFPC/DPPPRA  has  indicated  that  the
applicant is entitled to 4 Bronze Service  Stars  on  his  European-African-
Middle Eastern Campaign Medal, and the American Campaign  Medal,  and  World
War II Victory Medal, and these awards have been added  to  the  applicant’s
record.   We  note  that,  to  date,  the   applicant   has   not   provided
documentation to substantiate that he was apart of the 357th Infantry,  90th
Division.  Should the applicant provide this documentation, the Board  would
be inclined to review this case  again  for  possible  reconsideration.   In
view of the above, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary,  we  find
no compelling  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 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 AFBCMR Docket Number  01-02032
in Executive Session on 18 April 2002 and 25 June 2002 under the  provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

                 Mr. Roger E. Willmeth, Panel Chair
                 Mr. Clarence D. Long, III, Member
                 Ms. Martha Maust, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 25 April 2001, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 25 February 2002,
               w/atchs.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 March 2002.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 1 May 2002, w/atchs.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 6 May 2002.
   Exhibit G.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 May 2002.




                                   ROGER E. WILLMETH
                                   Panel Chair