RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:         1 November 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050002680


      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             |
|     |Ms. Yvonne Foskey                 |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. James E. Anderholm            |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Thomas E. O’Shaughessy        |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Carol A. Kornhoff             |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      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, in effect, award of the Bronze Star Medal
(BSM).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he would like to be awarded the BSM
based on his World War II service, and to have this award added to his
separation document (WD AGO Form 53-55).

3.  The applicant provides a WD AGO Form 53-55 and County of Bergen,
Department of Human Services, Division of Veterans Services Letter.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
which occurred on 31 October 1946.  The application submitted in this case
is dated
1 February 2005.

2.  Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for
correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery
of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law allows the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file
within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines that it
would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will
conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in
the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  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 (NPRC) 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.  This case is
being considered using reconstructed records, which primarily consist of
the applicant’s separation document and a Final Pay Worksheet (War
Department Form 372 A) that remains on file at the NPRC.

4.  The applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-55 confirms that he was inducted into
the Army and entered active duty on 11 July 1944.  It further shows that he
served in the Pacific Theater of Operations (PTO) from 20 January 1945
through 5 August 1946.  Item 30 (Military Occupational Specialty (MOS)
confirms the applicant served in MOS 055 (Motor Vehicle Dispatch Clerk).

5.  Item 33 (Decorations and Citations) of the applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-
55 shows he earned the following awards during his tenure on active duty:
Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM); World War II (WW II) Victory Medal; Asiatic-
Pacific Campaign Medal; and Army of Occupation Medal.  The applicant
authenticated this document with his signature in Item 56 (Signature of
Person Being Separated).

6.  The NPRC file included Final Payment-Work Sheet prepared on the
applicant during his separation processing on 31 October 1946.  This
document shows that his final net payment totaled $223.72.  His final pay
was based on credits for accrued base and longevity pay, furlough rations
pay, travel pay, and mustering-out pay.  The combat infantry payment block
of the credits portion of this document contained no entry, indicating that
he was not entitled to combat infantry pay.  The applicant authenticated
this document with his signature.

7.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy and
criteria concerning individual military awards.  Paragraph 3-13 of the
awards regulation outlines the criteria for award of the BSM.  Paragraph 3-
13d (2) of the awards regulation states, in effect, that the BSM is
authorized to members of the Armed Forces of the United States who, after 6
December 1941, were cited in orders or awarded a certificate for exemplary
conduct in ground combat against an armed enemy between 7 December 1941 and
2 September 1945.  This paragraph also stipulates that for this purpose, an
award of the CIB is considered as a citation in orders.

8.  War Department Circular 186-1944 provided that the Combat Infantryman
Badge (CIB) was to be awarded only to infantrymen serving with infantry
units of brigade, regimental or smaller size.  Additionally, World War II
holders of the CIB received a monthly pay supplement known as combat
infantry pay and holders of the EIB were entitled to expert infantry pay.
Therefore, soldiers had economic as well as intangible reasons to ensure
that their records were correct.  Thus, pay records are frequently the best
available source to verify entitlement to this award.  The Awards Branch,
Army Human Resources Command (AHRC), has advised in similar cases that,
during World War II, the CIB was normally awarded only to enlisted
individuals who served in the following positions:  Light machine gunner
(604); Heavy machine gunner (605); Platoon sergeant (651); Squad leader
(653); Rifleman (745); Automatic rifleman (746); Heavy weapons NCO (812);
and Gun crewman (864).
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s claim of entitlement to the BSM, as evidenced by the
Veterans Services Division letter he provides, is based on entitlement to
the CIB.  However, there is insufficient evidence to support granting the
requested relief.

2.  The Awards Branch, AHRC confirms that the policy in effect during World
War II authorized award of the CIB to members serving in one of the
following infantry positions and MOSs:  Light machine gunner (604); Heavy
machine gunner (605); Platoon sergeant (651); Squad leader (653); Rifleman
(745); Automatic rifleman (746); Heavy weapons NCO (812); and Gun crewman
(864).

3.  In this case, the applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-55 confirms he served in
MOS 055, and performed duties as a Motor Vehicle Dispatch Clerk.  Further,
a final payment work sheet on file is void of an entry in the combat
infantry pay block of the form, which indicates the applicant was not
receiving pay based on having been awarded the CIB at the time of his
discharge.  The applicant signed this document, thereby certifying that his
final payment was correct at the time.  Therefore, the regulatory criteria
necessary to support award of the CIB has not been satisfied in this case.


4.  Given the applicant was not awarded and is not entitled to the CIB, he
is also not eligible to receive the BSM he requested based on the criteria
outlined in the supporting letter he provided from the County of Bergen,
Department of Human Services, Division of Veterans Services.  Therefore,
there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support adding the BSM to his
separation document at this time.

5.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 2 January 1947, the date the Board was
created.  Therefore, the time for him to file request for correction of any
error or injustice expired on 1 January 1950.  He failed to file within the
3-year statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation
or evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
failure to timely file in this case.
BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___JEA _  ___TEO _  __CAK __  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented does not demonstrate
the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board
determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis
for correction of the records of the individual concerned.

2.  As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence
provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year
statute of limitations prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient
basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for
correction of the records of the individual concerned.




                                  ____James E. Anderholm___
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050002680                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005/11/01                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1946/10/31                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR615-365                               |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |Deny                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |                                        |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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