RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  1 May 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060012085 


	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, in effect, reconsideration of his earlier petition requesting that his father, a former service member (FSM), be awarded the  Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB), Bronze Star Medal (BSM), Purple Heart (PH), and Silver Star (SS).  

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he is providing the FSM's World War II (WWII) pay voucher, which clearly indicates he completed 12 months and 
15 days of foreign service.  He further claims the FSM was taken as a Prisoner of War (POW) by the Germans near Luxembourg, while operating a mortar, and was held as a POW from 20 December 1944 through June 1945.  He also states that the FSM's entire company was surrounded by the Germans and captured.  He also states that based on the FSM's participation in three campaigns, the final one being in the Huertgen Forest (for which the FSM was awarded medals), he believes the FSM should have been awarded the CIB.  He states that at the time of his release from the German POW camps, the FSM weighed a mere
80 pounds and was psychologically devastated.  

3.  The applicant further states, in effect, that he personally saw the fragment wounds on the FSM's legs and can personally swear to the information concerning how the FSM received these wounds while he was held captive by the Germans.  He also states he is submitting the FSM's National Cemetery Record of Internment (Form 4956), which shows the FSM received the PH.  He claims that the cemetery personnel indicated to him that they do not retain records; however, the documentation provided by the FSM in 1965, after the passing of his wife, justified the POW and PH notation on the grave marker.  He states that it seems ludicrous that Government personnel at a National Cemetery would accept anything less than adequate and official documents to support any notations being placed on a service grave marker.

4.  The applicant provides the following documents in support of his application:  Self-Authored Statement; Correction to DD Form 214 (DD Form 215); Application for World War II Compensation; Record of Interment (Form 4956); Situation Report Messages, dated 28 and 29 November 1944; and Newspaper Article Extract.

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 AR20050010934, on 22 February 2006.
2.  During the original consideration of this case, the Board notified the applicant that his requests that the FSM be awarded the BSM and SS would not be considered until all administrative remedies had been exhausted, and the applicant was advised of the procedures for applying for the awards in question, under the provisions of Title 10 of the United States Code, Section 1130 
(10 USC 1130) by separate letter.  There is no indication that the applicant has attempted to exhaust this administrative remedy; therefore, these awards will again not be considered by the Board or discussed further in this Record of Proceedings.  The applicant should refer to the letter he was provided during the original consideration of this case, a copy of which will again be provided, for award submission procedures under 10 USC 1130.

3.  During its original review, the Board concluded that although the FSM held and served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 745 (Rifleman), there was no orders or evidence showing he had been awarded the CIB by proper authority while serving on active duty, and that his final payment voucher did not show he was receiving combat infantry pay, which would have been authorized if he held the CIB.  Further, the Board found no evidence to confirm the applicant was ever wounded in action, or that he was treated for a combat related wound or injury received as a result of enemy action.  As a result, it was concluded there was insufficient evidence to support award of the PH or CIB to the FSM.  

4.  In his reconsideration request, the applicant submits an Application for World War II Compensation, dated 18 February 1950; Situation Report Messages prepared by the Company Reconnaissance Troop Platoon Leader for 
27 November through 29 November 1944, which indicates that the platoon received enemy machine gun and small arms fire on these dates; and a Record of Interment from the Beverly National Cemetery, which shows the FSM had received the PH, which was considered by the Board during its original review.

5.  The FSM's WD AGO Form 53-55 shows that he was inducted into the Army of the United States on 13 April 1943 and entered active duty on 20 April 1943.  This document also shows that his organization was the 28th Infantry Division, and that he served in the European Theater of Operations (ETO) from 6 June 1944 to 1 June 1945.  

6.  The FSM's WD AGO Form 53-55 further shows that he was credited with participating in the Normandy, Northern France, Rhineland, and Ardennes campaigns.  Item 30 (Military Occupational Specialty and No.) shows he held the MOS 607 (Light Mortar Crewman).  Item 31 (Military Qualifications) does not include the CIB, and Item 33 (Decorations and Citations) shows he earned the Army Good Conduct Medal, American Campaign Medal, and European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal during his active duty tenure.  Item 34 (Wounds Received in Action) contains the entry "None" and the PH and CIB are not listed anywhere on the separation document.  The FSM authenticated this document with his signature on the date of his separation, which was 3 November 1945.  

7.  The FSM's WD AGO Form 100 shows he served in MOS 521 (Infantry Basic) for a period of 3 months, MOS 745 (Rifleman) for a period of 18 months, and MOS 607 (Light Mortar Crewman) for a period of 12 months.  It also shows that the FSM served as a light mortar crewman while assigned to the 28th Infantry Division, while serving in the ETO.

8.  There are no orders or other documents available to show the FSM was ever awarded the CIB or PH by the proper authority while serving on active duty.  Further, a Final Payment Worksheet (WD Form 372A) on file at the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) pertaining to the FSM shows he was not receiving combat infantry pay at the time of his separation on 3 November 1945.

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy and criteria concerning individual military awards.  Paragraph 2-8 contains the regulatory guidance pertaining to awarding the PH.  It states, in pertinent part, that the PH is awarded to any member of the Armed Forces who, while serving in any capacity with one of the Armed Services after 5 April 1917, has been wounded or killed as a result of hostile action by an enemy.  A wound is defined as an injury to any part of the body from an outside force or agent sustained as a result of enemy action.  A wound is defined as an injury to any part of the body from an outside force, element, or agent sustained while in action in the face of the armed enemy or as a result of a hostile act of such enemy.

10.  War Department Circular 269-1943 established the CIB and the Expert Infantryman Badge (EIB) to recognize and provide an incentive to infantrymen.  The EIB was to be awarded for attainment of certain proficiency standards or by satisfactory performance of duty in action against the enemy.  The CIB was awarded for exemplary conduct in action against the enemy.  

11.  War Department Circular 186-1944 further 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 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 Military Awards Branch of the U.S. Army Human Resources Command, (USAHRC) has advised in similar cases that, during World War II, the CIB was normally awarded only to enlisted individuals who served in the following 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).  MOS 607 (Light Mortar Crewman) was not considered a qualifying infantry MOS for CIB purposes during this period. 

12.  War Department Technical Manuel TM 12-235, which prescribed the policy and procedure for the preparation and distribution of separation documents during the period in question contained guidance indicating that only the MOS held at the time of separation would be entered in Item 30 of the WD AGO Form 53-55.  The service in all MOSs held and served in were to be documented in the Military Occupational Assignments portion of the WD AGO Form 100.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that the FSM is entitled to award of the CIB was carefully considered.  However, 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.  

2.  Although the evidence of this case confirms that during the FSM's service in the ETO, he served in an infantry unit in MOS 607 as a light mortar crewman, this MOS was not considered a qualifying infantry MOS at that time, as evidenced by the Military Awards Branch guidance regarding qualifying MOSs during World War II.  Further, the CIB is not included in Item 31 of the FSM's 
WD AGO Form 53-55 which it would have been had he been awarded it during his active duty tenure. 

3.  In addition, the FSM's 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.  Therefore, absent any evidence indicating he was awarded the CIB by proper authority while serving on active duty, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support granting this portion of the requested relief.  

4.  The applicant's contention that the FSM is entitled to award of the PH was also carefully considered.  However, by regulation, in order to support award of the PH, there must be evidence that the wound for which the award is being made was received as a result of enemy action, that it required treatment by military medical personnel, and a record of this medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.  

5.  The veracity of the applicant’s claim that the FSM was wounded in action and entitled to the PH is not in question.  However, notwithstanding the Record of Internment provided by the applicant, absent any evidence of record that corroborates that the FSM received a wound/injury as a result of enemy action, or that he was ever treated for a combat related wound or injury, or that he was awarded the PH by proper authority while serving on active duty, the regulatory burden of proof necessary to support award of the PH still has not been satisfied in this case.  

6.  The applicant is advised that if he can provide the documents the FSM submitted to the National Cemetery (ie PH Orders or Certificate), he may resubmit his application.  However, absent these documents of confirmation, the Record of Internment alone is not sufficient to support the correction of a valid military record or to support award of the PH.  

7.  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.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__x   _  _x__  __x __  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20050010934, dated 22 February 2006.




_____x_____
          CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060012085
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
2007/05/01
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
HD
DATE OF DISCHARGE
1945/11/03
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR . . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON

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

3.

4.

5.

6.