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:

			Panel Chair
			Member
			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.