PROCEEDINGS


         IN THE CASE OF:
        

         BOARD DATE: 11 July 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2001066166


         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.

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director
Mr. W. E. Schnupp		Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. Ted S. Kanamine		Chairperson
Mr. John T. Meixell		Member
Mr. Harry B. Oberg		Member

         The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

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

FINDINGS :

1. The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

---

2. The applicant requests, in effect, that he be promoted to the grade of captain and that he receive the Presidential Unit Citation (PUC).

3. The applicant states that there is no error or injustice in his records. However, when he was separated, he was told that if his last efficiency report was satisfactory or better, he could receive a promotion to the next rank. If he is entitled to such a promotion, he would like to have it. He says also, that to the best of his knowledge, his unit received the PUC, which is not reflected on his separation document.

4. In support of his request, he submits a copy of his efficiency report for the period 24 October 1945 to 31 December 1945.

5. The applicant’s military records show that he completed Officers Candidate School, was commissioned a 2^nd lieutenant on 24 May 1943, and was advanced to the grade of 1^st lieutenant on 17 September 1944. He served in the Asiatic-Pacific Theater of Operations principally with F Company, 124^th Infantry, as an infantry platoon leader and company executive officer from January 1944 to March 1946. He was placed in a terminal leave status on 29 March 1946, and was honorably separated to the US Army Reserve on 20 June 1946 in the grade of 1^st lieutenant.

6. Awards reflected on his WD AGO Form 53-98, Military Record and Report of Separation, include the Combat Infantry Badge (CIB), the American Theater Service Medal, the Asiatic-Pacific Service Medal, the Victory Medal and the Philippine Liberation Service Medal. Subsequent to his release from active duty, and at his request, the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) determined on 15 August 1996 and 13 December 2001, that he was also entitled to the following additional awards: the Bronze Star Medal (based on the CIB), the Presidential Unit Citation, the Philippine Presidential Unit Citation and 2 bronze service stars and the bronze arrowhead devices to the Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal. Documentation in his records supports each of the awards issued by the NPRC.

7. The applicant’s WD AGO Form 66-1, Officer’s and Warrant Officer’s Qualification Card, shows that his manner of performance was rated as Very Satisfactory (VS) for three rating periods and exceptional for two other periods. The record has faded and is undecipherable for four other rating periods. Three actual efficiency reports on file indicate that he received a VS rating for one of the periods and an excellent for two others. Ratings at the time ranged in ascending order from unsatisfactory, satisfactory, VS, excellent and superior.

8. In 1945, the War Department announced a new promotion policy for officers released as the result of demobilization after WWII. This policy was eventually codified in War Department Circular 140, 15 May 1946, Promotion of Officers on Relief from Active Duty, commonly referred to as terminal leave promotions. The policy provided, in pertinent part, for the promotion of certain officers to the next higher grade (from first lieutenant through colonel) upon their separation from active duty. Officers were required to have served two years on active duty since 1940, and not have been promoted or, held their prior grade a specified period of time in order to qualify for a one-grade promotion on release from active duty. In the case of promotions from first lieutenant to captain, the specified period was 18 months, however, the circular also provided that officers would be given 50 percent credit for all time spent in the lower grade overseas. Promotions would be effective the date the officer departed active duty on terminal leave.

9. Officers who served time in grade on active duty as specified above, and attained a minimum efficiency index of 40 or more, were eligible for promotion incident to relief from active duty. The efficiency index was determined by multiplying each ratings numerical value by the number of months for which the rating was given and dividing the sum by the total number of months the rating was given.

10. Promotions made in accordance with the foregoing authority, were temporary, expired automatically at the end of the official termination of the war plus 6 months, and did not affect the status of the individual in the Officers’ Reserve Corps, or in the National Guard of the United States, in their lower permanent grade.

11. Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-1, Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register, shows that during the time of the applicant’s assignment to F Company, 124^th Infantry, the unit was awarded campaign credit for the Western Pacific (Ground), in addition to the two campaigns already shown on his WD AGO Form 53-98.

CONCLUSIONS:

1. It appears that the promotion the applicant is seeking is a so-called terminal leave promotion that the Army administered upon demobilization at the conclusion of World War II. Unfortunately, a complete record of the applicant’s efficiency reports is not available so it is not possible to determine his efficiency index.

2. However, the records that are available suggest that he was an excellent officer, as evidenced by his having received the CIB, promotion to 1^st lieutenant while an infantry unit leader in a combat environment and efficiency ratings of VS and excellent in his combat leadership positions. Given his combat record, it is the Board’s view that he would probably have met the minimum efficiency index specified had his full record been available for review.

3. Accordingly, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant’s records to show that he was promoted to the grade of captain effective on the date he entered terminal leave status - 29 March 1946.

4. The question of his receiving the PUC was resolved when that award was issued by the NPRC. Moreover, he is also entitled to a third bronze battle star to his Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal as having been a member of F Company, 124^th Infantry, at the time it was awarded campaign credit for the battle of the Western Pacific (Ground). It would therefore be appropriate to add the following awards to his WD AGO Form 53-98: the Bronze Star Medal (based on the CIB), the PUC, the Philippine Presidential Unit Citation and 3 bronze service stars and the bronze arrowhead devices to the Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal.

5. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by:

a. showing that the individual concerned received a relief from active duty promotion to the grade of captain effective 28 March 1946; and

         b. showing that he was awarded the Bronze Star Medal, the PUC, the Philippine Presidential Unit Citation and 3 bronze service stars and the bronze arrowhead devices for his Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal.

BOARD VOTE:

___jtm___ ___tsk__ ___hbo__ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION




                  __________Ted S. Kanamine_____
                  CHAIRPERSON

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001066166
SUFFIX
RECON	YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED	20020711
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION	(GRANT PLUS)
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 107.00
2. 131.08
3.
4.
5.
6.