RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:         15 November 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050004119


      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. Stanley Kelley                |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. John T. Meixell               |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Robert L. Duecaster           |     |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, that a Bronze Star Medal (BSM) he was
awarded be added to his separation document (DD Form 214).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he was awarded the BSM, but he never
received it.

3.  The applicant provides a newspaper article in support of his
application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
that
occurred on 5 May 1953.  The application submitted in this case is dated 6
March 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 record shows that he initially was inducted and entered
active duty into the United States Army on 25 June 1951.  He was trained
in, awarded and served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 3729
(Combat Construction Specialist).  It also shows the highest rank he
attained while serving on active duty was sergeant (SGT).

4.  The applicant’s Soldier's Qualification Card (DA Form 20) shows he
served two tours in Korea. During his Korea service, he was assigned to
Company B, 2nd Engineer Combat Battalion, 2nd Infantry Division, from 20
February through 3 June 1952, performing duties in MOS 3279 as a Pioneer.
He was also assigned to Company C, 2nd Engineer Combat Battalion, 2nd
Infantry Division, from 20 July 1952 through 5 April 1953, performing
duties in MOS 3729 as Combat Construction Specialist.

5.  On 10 March 1953, the applicant's commander submitted a Recommendation
for Award Meritorious Achievement or Service on the applicant.  The unit
commander recommended the applicant for the BSM, for his meritorious
service in Korea from 6 October 1952 through 10 March 1953.  This form
indicates that the recommended BSM was downgraded to the Commendation
Ribbon with Metal Pendant, now known as the Army Commendation Medal
(ARCOM), by the award approval authority.

6.  On 18 March 1953, General Orders Number 88, issued by Headquarters
2nd Infantry Division, awarded the applicant the BSM, his meritorious
service in Korea from 6 October 1952 through 10 March 1953; however, on 25
March 1953, these orders were revoked.

7.  On 27 March 1953, General Orders Number 99, issued by the Headquarters
2nd Infantry Division, awarded the applicant the Commendation Ribbon with
Metal Pendant, for his meritorious service in Korea from 6 October 1952
through 10 March 1953.

8.  On 5 May 1953, the applicant was honorably separated after completing a
total of 1 year, 10 months and 11 days of active military service.

9.  The DD Form 214 the applicant was issued upon his separation shows that
during his active duty tenure, he earned the following awards:  Korean
Service Medal with 3 bronze service stars; United Nations Service Medal;
and Commendation Ribbon with Metal Pendant.  The applicant authenticated
this document with his signature on the date of his separation.

10.  The applicant provides a newspaper article extract that indicates he
was awarded the BSM for his meritorious service in Korea.
9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy and
criteria concerning individual military awards.  Paragraph 1-29 states, in
pertinent part, that once an award has been presented, it may be revoked by
the awarding authority.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s claim that he was awarded the BSM and the supporting
evidence he provided were carefully considered.  However, there is
insufficient evidence to support his claim.

2.  The applicant's record confirms the award approval authority downgraded
BSM recommended by the applicant’s commander to the Commendation Ribbon
with Metal Pendant.  As a result, the erroneous BSM orders issued were
revoked by proper authority shortly after they were published.

3.  The record further confirms the applicant was awarded the Commendation
Ribbon with Metal Pendant for the period of meritorious service in Korea,
for which the BSM was originally recommended.

4.  Further, the Commendation Ribbon with Metal Pendant and not the BSM is
included in the list of authorized awards contained on the applicant’s
separation document, which he authenticated with his signature on the date
of his separation.  His signature on the DD Form 214, in effect, was his
verification that the information it contained, to include the list of
awards, was correct at the time the separation document was prepared and
issued.  Therefore, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support
award of the BSM for this period of service at this time.

5.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 5 May 1953.  Therefore, the time for
him to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 4
May 1956.  The applicant did not 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

___SK___  ___JTM _  ___RLD_  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.




                                  _____Stanley Kelley_______
                                            CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050004119                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005-11-15                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1953/05/05                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR615-363 . . . . .                     |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |107                                     |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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