RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  1 March 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060011320 


	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.


X
	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, that his separation document (WD AGO Form 53-55) dated 27 November 1946, be corrected to add the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that although he was awarded the CIB, it is not reflected on his WD AGO Form 53-55.  He further states that he now requests that his WD AGO Form 53-55 be corrected to show this award of the CIB.

3.  The applicant provides his WD AGO Form 53-55 in support of his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice that occurred on 27 November 1946.  The application submitted in this case is dated 4 August 2006.

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 consists of the applicant’s WD AGO 53-55 and Final Payment Worksheet (WD Form 372A).

4.  The applicant’s WD AGO 53-55 confirms he was inducted into the Army and entered active duty on 4 October 1944.  It also shows that he served in the Pacific Theater of Operations (PTO), in the Philippine Islands, where he arrived on 17 March 1945 and remained until returning to the United States on 
9 September 1946. 
5.  Item 4 (Arm of Service) of the applicant's WD AGO Form 53-55 contains an entry that indicates he was a member of the Ordnance Corps branch of service.  Item 6 (Organization) shows he was assigned to the 229th Ordnance Base Depot, and Item 30 further shows he was trained in and served in Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) 650 (Switchboard Operator).  

6.  Item 31 (Military Qualifications) contains the entry "Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle (M-1) Bar.”  Item 32 (Battles and Campaigns) shows he participated in the Luzon and Southern Philippines campaigns, and Item 33 (Decorations and Citations) shows he earned the Army of Occupation Medal; Asiatic Pacific Campaign Medal, Good Conduct Medal, Philippine Liberation Ribbon; and the World War II Victory Medal.  

7.  A Final Payment Worksheet (WD Form 372A) pertaining to the applicant on file at the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) is void of any entry related to combat infantry pay.  

8.  War Department Circular 186-1944 provided that the 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.  Therefore, Soldiers had economic as well as tangible reasons to ensure that their records were correct.  Thus, pay records are frequently the best available source to verify entitlement to this award.  

9.  The Military Awards Branch of the U.S. Army Human Resources Command, (USAHRC) has advised in similar cases that, during World War II, the Combat Infantryman Badge 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).

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) Paragraph 5-14 contains guidance on the Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal.  It states, in pertinent part, that a bronze arrowhead is authorized for assault landing credit and a bronze service star is authorized for each campaign a member is credited with participating in while in the PTO.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contention that he was awarded the CIB was carefully considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence to support this claim.
2.  By regulation, In order to support award of the CIB, there must be evidence confirming that the member held and served in an infantry MOS, that he served in a qualifying infantry unit of brigade, regimental or smaller size, and that he was personally present with the unit and participated while the unit was engaged in active ground combat with enemy forces.  

3.  The evidence in this case confirms the applicant held and served in MOS 650 as a switchboard operator, and that he was a member of the Ordnance Corps assigned to an Ordnance unit.  There is no evidence indicating that her ever held or served in an infantry MOS in a qualifying infantry unit during World War II.  Further, there is no indication in Item 31 of his WD AGO Form 53-55 that he was ever awarded the CIB by proper authority while serving on active duty.  In addition, his WD Form 372A confirms he was not receiving combat infantry pay at the time of his separation, which he would have been had he held the CIB.

4.  Absent any evidence that the applicant was ever recommended for, or awarded the CIB by proper authority while serving on active duty, or that he held and served in an infantry MOS in a qualifying infantry unit and participated with this unit in active ground combat, the regulatory burden of proof necessary to support award of the CIB has not been satisfied in this case.  

5.  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. 

6.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 27 November 1946.  Therefore, based on the date the Board was established, 2 January 1947, the time for him to file a 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.

7.  The evidence confirms the applicant participated in the Luzon and Southern Philippines campaigns.  Therefore, he is entitled to 2 bronze service stars with his Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal.  

8.  The omission of the bronze service stars referred to in the preceding paragraph is an administrative matter that does not require Board action.  


Therefore, the Case Management Support Division (CMSD), St. Louis, Missouri, 
will administratively correct his record as outlined in paragraph 3 of the
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION section below.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__X__  ___X_  __X__  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.

3.  The Board determined that administrative error in the records of the individual should be corrected.  Therefore, the Board requests that the CMSD-St. Louis administratively correct the records of the individual concerned by showing his entitlement to 2 bronze service stars with his Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal; and by providing him a correction to his separation document that reflects this change.




_____X____
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060011320
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
2007/03/01
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
HD
DATE OF DISCHARGE
1946/11/27
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
 . . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
Mr. Schwartz
ISSUES         1.
107
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.