RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        11 January 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2004105156


      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. Robert J. McGowan             |     |Senior Analyst       |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Linda D. Simmons              |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. John T. Meixell               |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Carol A. Kornhoff             |     |Member               |

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, through the offices of the Honorable Mike
DeWine and the Honorable George Voinovich, United States Senators,
reconsideration of his previous request that his deceased father's (the
former service member, or FSM) service records be corrected to show that he
was appointed a second lieutenant.

2.  The applicant states that when the FSM died on 24 March 1945, he was
performing the duties of an officer and awaiting a battlefield commission
to the rank of second lieutenant.  Only the FSM's untimely death prevented
the appointment.

3.  The applicant provides two new documents that were not previously
considered by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR).

      a.  The first document is a 3 September 2003 letter from Major
General Charles H. Jones, US Army (Retired).  General Jones states that, in
1945, he was the Assistant Plans and Operations Officer in the FSM's unit,
the 466th Parachute Field Artillery Battalion.  He states that it was a
known fact the FSM would be offered a battlefield commission as soon as all
the paperwork was finalized.

      b.  The second document is a 27 December 2002 letter from Dr. John F.
Magill, PhD.  Dr. Magill states that he worked with the FSM and assumed
that his battlefield commission had been approved as he parachuted into
Germany during Operation Varsity in the role of a second lieutenant forward
artillery observer.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  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
AR2002081777 on 1 May 2003.

2.  The applicant’s military records are not available to the Board for
review.  A fire destroyed approximately 18 million service members’ records
at the National Personnel Records Center in 1973.  It is believed that the
applicant’s records
were lost or destroyed in that fire.  However, there were sufficient
documents remaining in a reconstructed record for the Board to conduct a
fair and impartial review of this case.

3.  Evidence of record suggests that the FSM entered military service in an
undetermined, inactive capacity on 1 September 1938.  He was inducted into
the Army of the United States and entered on active duty on 2 September
1941.  He was assigned to the 466th Parachute Field Artillery Battalion,
17th Airborne Division, serving with that unit for the duration of World
War II.

4.  The 17th Airborne Division was activated at Camp Mackall, North
Carolina on 15 April 1943.  The core units of the newly formed division
were the 513th Parachute Infantry Regiment (PIR) and the 193rd and 194th
Glider Infantry Regiments (GIR).  After the Normandy invasion, the 507th
PIR was permanently attached to the division which was stationed in the
United Kingdom from 25 August to 23 December 1944.  The 466th Parachute
Field Artillery Battalion was assigned to the Division in August 1943.

5.  Toward the end of August 1944, the 17th Airborne Division, the 82nd
Airborne Division and the 101st Airborne Division became permanent units of
the US XVIII Airborne Corps.  When Operation Market Garden was conceived,
the 17th Airborne was still in training.  Consequently, it was held in
reserve. This was not the case during the German Ardennes Offensive.

6.  From 23 to 25 December 1944, elements of the Division were flown to the
Reims area in France in spectacular night flights.  These elements closed
in at Mourmelon.  After taking over the defense of the Meuse River sector
from Givet to Verdun on 25 December, the 17th moved to Neufchateau,
Belgium, then marched through the snow to Morhet, relieving the 28th
Infantry Division on 3 January 1945.

7.  The Division entered the Ardennes campaign (4-9 January 1945) at the
Battle of Dead Man's Ridge.  It captured several small Belgian towns and
entered Flamierge on 7 January, but enemy counterattacks necessitated a
withdrawal.  However, constant pressure and aggressive patrolling caused
the enemy to retreat to the Our River.  On 18 January, the Division
relieved the 11th Armored Division at Houffalize, pushed enemy remnants
from the Bulge, and seized Wattermal and Espeler on 26 January 1945.

8.  Coming under control of III Corps, the 17th turned toward Luxembourg,
taking Eschweiler and Clervaux and clearing the enemy from the west bank of
the Our River.  Aggressive patrols crossed the river to probe the Siegfried
Line defenses and established a limited bridgehead near Dasburg before
being relieved by the 6th Armored Division on 10 February 1945.  Sometime
after the 17th Airborne Division was withdrawn from combat, the FSM, who
was a sergeant serving as a Battalion Liaison Sergeant, was identified for
a battlefield commission and a recommendation for appointment was
processed.

9.  In early February 1945, the tide of battle was such as to enable an
accurate estimate as to when and where the 2nd British Army would be ready
to force a crossing of the Rhine River.  It was determined that the
crossing would be in conjunction with an airborne operation by XVIII
Airborne Corps.  The sector selected for the assault was in the vicinity of
Wesel, Germany, just north of the Ruhr River.  Set for 24 March 1945,
Operation Varsity would be the last full scale airborne drop of World War
II and the assignment went to the 17th Airborne Division with the 507th PIR
spearheading the assault, dropping at the southern edge of the Diersfordter
Forest, three mile northwest of Wesel.  In anticipation of his imminent
appointment as a second lieutenant, the Commanding Officer, 466th Parachute
Field Artillery Battalion assigned the FSM to an officer billet as a
Forward Artillery Observer.

10.  On the 24th March 1945, taking off from marshalling areas in France in
nearly perfect weather, nearly 4000 aircraft from the British 6th Airborne
Division and the 17th US Airborne Division dropped paratroopers behind
enemy lines, into Westphalia in the vicinity of Weselon, east of the Rhine
River.  Their mission was to capture key points and so assist the advance
of the ground troops.  The FSM was parachuted in with his unit.
Unfortunately, the 466th Parachute Field Artillery Battalion encountered
some of the bitterest fighting in the accomplishment of the objectives
assigned to the 17th Airborne Division.  Landing in a drop zone completely
covered by accurate fire from enemy artillery emplacements, the unit took
heavy casualties.  The FSM was among those casualties and was killed in
action on the opening day of Operation Varsity [24 March 1945] while
performing the duties of a second lieutenant.

11.  In an 11 April 1945 letter to the FSM's widow, the Commanding Officer,
466th Parachute Field Artillery Battalion stated, "Because of his qualities
of leadership, his ability to understand his fellow soldier and his
intelligence, he had, prior to his death, been recommended for a field
commission as Second
Lieutenant. . . . He was at that time [of his death] performing the duties
and assignment of an officer instead of an enlisted man in anticipation of
his forthcoming appointment."

12.  Army Regulation (AR) 135-100, Appointment of Commissioned and Warrant
Officers of the Army, prescribes policy and procedures for the appointment
of commissioned and warrant officers in the Army National Guard of the
United States (ARNGUS) and the United States Army Reserve (USAR).  Chapter
5 prescribes special requirements and procedures for tendering posthumous
appointments as a USAR commissioned officer.  It states, in pertinent part,
that a posthumous commission may be issued to a Soldier who was officially
recommended for appointment and the recommendation was approved; however,
the Soldier died in the line of duty before being able to accept the
appointment.  It further states that "[N]o person is entitled to any bonus,
gratuity, pay, or allowance because of a posthumous commission or warrant."
 Approval of requests for posthumous commissions resides with the US Army
Human Resources Command – St. Louis, Missouri.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The record confirms that the FSM had been recommended for " a field
commission as Second Lieutenant."  The record also confirms that, at the
time of his death, the FSM was performing the duties of a commissioned
officer.

2.  During World War II, battlefield commissions were approved by the War
Department.  From 1941-1945 approximately 25,500 men were awarded
battlefield commissions worldwide.  At the conclusion of the war, a board
of officers reporting to the Commanding General of the European Theater
stated "The one sure method of determining whether any individual has
qualities which make him a successful leader in combat is to observe that
man in combat.”  Battlefield commissions were often accomplished in order
to fill severe shortages of company-grade officers.

3.  There is no proof in the record that the appropriate appointing
authority ever acted on the recommendation to award the FSM a battlefield
commission.  However, given the extreme need for qualified company-grade
officers, as well as the high esteem in which the FSM was held by his chain-
of-command, it seems likely that the recommendation would have been
approved.  Since the FSM was performing the duties of an officer when he
was killed, it also seems likely he would have accepted the appointment.

4.  Pertinent Army regulations state that no person is entitled to any
bonus, gratuity, pay, or allowance because of a posthumous commission or
warrant; the only benefit to such an act would be to acknowledge the
devotion to duty and the sacrifice paid by the FSM in the service of his
country.

5.  Given the unique circumstances in this case, and in the interest of
justice and equity, it would be appropriate to correct the records of the
FSM as indicated below.

BOARD VOTE:

__lds___  __jtm___  __cak___  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant
amendment of the ABCMR’s decision in Docket Number AR AR2002081777, dated
1 May 2003.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the
Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by:

      a.  Showing that the recommendation to award the FSM a battlefield
commission as a second lieutenant was approved by the appropriate approving
authority on 23 March 1945; and

      b.  Pursuant to paragraph 5-3a(3), AR 135-100, the FSM is
posthumously appointed as a Reserve of the Army and commissioned in the
rank of second lieutenant, effective 24 March 1945.



                                        Linda D. Simmons
                                  ______________________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2004105156                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050111                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT                                   |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |131.0000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]