Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001066042C070421
Original file (2001066042C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
        


         BOARD DATE: 23 April 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2001066042

         I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun Director
Mr. Jessie B. Strickland Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Ms. Karol A. Kennedy Chairperson
Mr. Mark D. Manning Member
Mr. Thomas Lanyi Member

         The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date. In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

         The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military
records
         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
         advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS: Reconsideration of his previous request to have his separation document (WD AGO Form 53-55) corrected to show that he was promoted to the rank of sergeant (SGT).

APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he served with Company A, 359th Infantry Regiment, 90th Infantry Division during combat at the Siegfried Line. He goes on to state that his SGT told him that he had been promoted to private first class (PFC) and later during combat his SGT/squad leader was killed and the platoon sergeant placed him (the applicant) in charge of the squad and told him that he was promoted to buck SGT. He further states that he was wounded on 22 February 1945 and was listed as a SGT on the hospital records. However, when he was discharged it was as a PFC instead of SGT. He also states that not only should he have been promoted to SGT, he should also have been promoted to the rank of Staff SGT while he was in the hospital. In support of his application he submits copies of newspaper articles indicating he was a SGT, and contends that it should be sufficient to show he was a SGT. He also provides a letter from another former soldier in his unit who attest that he knew of the applicant’s promotion at the time.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records were destroyed in the 1973 fire at the National Personnel Records Center fire in St. Louis, Missouri, which destroyed millions of service records. However, information obtained from reconstructed records show:

He was inducted at Jefferson Barracks, Missouri, on 16 August 1944. He completed his training as a rifleman and departed for the European Theater of Operations (ETO) on 8 January 1945. He participated in the Rhineland and Ardennes Campaigns and was wounded on 8 February and 22 February 1945. He was awarded the Purple Heart for each of his wounds.

He departed the ETO on 12 June 1945 and was transferred to Fitzsimmons General Hospital in Denver Colorado. He was advanced to the rank of PFC on 18 July 1945 and remained at Fitzsimmons until he was honorably discharged on 21 February 1947 and was issued a Certificate of Disability for Discharge.

A review of hospital admission records compiled by the Department of the Army, Office of the Surgeon General, indicates that the applicant was admitted to the hospital on two occasions and on both occasions was admitted in the rank of private. The applicant’s final pay document indicates that he was discharged in the rank of PFC.

A review of the newspaper articles submitted by the applicant all indicate that the applicant was recently promoted to the rank of SGT or was serving as a SGT. None of the articles indicate that the information was provided by the Army and the text of the articles suggest that the information was provided to the local paper by family members.

The third party letter authored by a former member of the applicant’s unit indicates that he served with the applicant from the beginning of basic training until he was wounded. He also states that the applicant was always selected for leadership positions and he heard the platoon SGT tell the applicant that he was promoted to the rank of SGT and was the squad leader. He asserts that the applicant did the job and deserves to have the rank that went along with the responsibility.

Special Regulation (SR) 615-25-50 provided the criteria for enlisted promotions during periods of rapid expansion. It provided, in pertinent part, that in a combat zone, the commander of a unit, for which a general officer is the assigned or authorized commander, is authorized to promote enlisted personnel one grade without regard to any local grade vacancy or major command ceiling in recognition of a specific combat action of extraordinary or heroic nature by such an individual. Normal promotions will be made based on unit vacancies by the designated unit commander.

DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

2. Although the applicant has submitted several articles indicating that he was a SGT, none of those articles indicate that they were submitted by Army officials.

3. The available evidence clearly shows that he was promoted to the rank of PFC after he departed the ETO, while he was hospitalized.

4. While the Board does not doubt that he was placed in the position as he claims, the regulation in effect at the time did not authorize the platoon SGT the authority to promote individuals at any time. Additionally, the passage of time and the unavailability of records and personnel that could explain the intent of the advancement are simply no longer available.

5. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION : The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE :

________ ________ ________ GRANT

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___ mdm _ ___ kak __ ___ tl ____ DENY APPLICATION



                  Carl W. S. Chun
                  Director, Army Board for Correction
of Military Records



INDEX

CASE ID AR2001066042
SUFFIX
RECON YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED 2002/04/23
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
DATE OF DISCHARGE
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 319 131.0900/ADV GRD
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070006104C071029

    Original file (20070006104C071029.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    During its original review of the case, the Board found that in the absence of evidence to the contrary and at 60 years removed, it must be presumed that the applicant was not promoted to SSG because there was no vacancy in that grade at the time, and it concluded there was insufficient evidence to support granting the requested relief. He states the resulting vacancy was filled by promoting the next in rank (CPL 1st Gunner), which was him, to squad leader, which called for a rating of SSG...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003089360C070403

    Original file (2003089360C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. The available evidence shows that the applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States on 31 May 1944 and served until honorably discharged on 9 October 1945, a total of 1 year, 4 months, and 10 days. The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090052C070212

    Original file (2003090052C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant provides, in support of his application, an undated newspaper article which announces his status as a POW; a self-authored letter, dated 20 May 1995; two Department of the Army Memorandums, dated 12 September 1996 and 17 October 1996, respectively; a letter addressed to a retired Army Colonel, dated 8 December 2001; an undated newspaper clipping which announces his advancement to the grade of SGT; a notice of change of address (WD AGO 204) with an undecipherable date; an...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110000754

    Original file (20110000754.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant provides: * Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) Record of Proceedings (ROP) awarding the Purple Heart to Private First Class (PFC) E____ R. H____ * a newspaper article showing award of the Purple Heart to PFC E____ R. H____ * a statement from PFC E____ R. H____ * two previously-submitted witness statements CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Therefore, he is entitled to award of the Purple Heart and correction of his records to show his wound and this medal. As a...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090272C070212

    Original file (2003090272C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant's military records are not available to the Board for review. The applicant has provided no evidence to suggest that he should have been assigned a Regular Army serial number. Records show the applicant should have discovered the error or injustice now under consideration on 21 September 1945, the date he separated from active duty.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070010966

    Original file (20070010966.TXT) Auto-classification: Approved

    Stone Member The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant's records show that, following his transatlantic crossing, he was assigned to Company L, 28th Infantry Regiment, 8th Infantry Division. The applicant requests that his rank be corrected to show that he was a "Gunnery Sergeant."

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070008788C071029

    Original file (20070008788C071029.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant provided a letter from his former platoon sergeant in the reconstituted Company F, who stated the acting commander of the new company had the names of the men who were to be promoted to squad leaders (Staff Sergeants) [and] to be given to the company clerk. There is no evidence of record at this late date to show the applicant was recommended for promotion to Staff Sergeant (and any “promotion” by the Company F commander would have been a temporary appointment). The evidence...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001059551C070421

    Original file (2001059551C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. However, the available records show that the Adjutant General’s Office (AGO) of the War Department responded to an inquiry from the applicant regarding his reduction from the rank of Sgt to the rank of private. Notwithstanding that the applicant was properly reduced in grade in accordance with the applicable regulations, the applicant’s promotion to the rank of sergeant...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100013926

    Original file (20100013926.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20090012407, on 18 March 2010. His records contain a WD Form 372A, dated 7 December 1945, that show upon his separation from the Army, he held the grade of PFC and received his final payment as a PFC. Item 3 (Grade) of his WD AGO Form 53-55 shows his grade at the time of separation...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002066721C070402

    Original file (2002066721C070402.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant states, in effect, that the highest rank the FSM held during his active duty tenure was SGT. The Board notes the applicant’s contention that the highest grade the FSM held on active duty was SGT and it carefully considered the documents submitted by the applicant to support her claim. During the processing of this case, the Board did find that the FSM was awarded the BSM based on having earned the CIB during World War II.