IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  19 April 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100023059 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests correction of his military records:

* to show award of the Belgian Fourragere
* to show award of the Presidential Unit Citation (PUC)
* to show award of the Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM)
* to show his service in North Africa [Algeria-French Morocco campaign]
* to explain his lost time in 1943

2.  The applicant states his unit was awarded the Belgian Fourragere and the PUC.  He also contends he never received his ARCOM for the period from 29 April 1963 to 31 August 1964.  He is inquiring about his lost time in 1943.  He was a radio operator at the time and did not miss a day on the job.  He does not recall the details of why he lost the time.

3.  The applicant provides copies of his WD AGO Form 53-55 (Enlisted Record and Report of Separation – Honorable Discharge) for the period ending 10 July 1945, DA Form 1506 (Statement of Service – for Computation of Length of Service for Pay Purposes), and his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) for the period ending 31 August 1964.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  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 also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant's WD AGO Form 24 (Service Record) shows:

	a.  he departed New York on 12 December 1942 and arrived in Casablanca, French Morocco, on 24 December 1942;

	b.  on 9 May 1943, he was convicted by a special court-martial of willfully leaving the bivouac area without permission and was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 3 months and fined $39.00 pay per month for 3 months;

	c.  on 26 May 1943, the unexecuted portion of the sentence to confinement was suspended;

	d.  lost time was recorded from 9 to 25 May 1943 (17 days);

	e.  on 7 June 1945, the applicant was favorably considered for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal; and

	f.  on 5 July 1945, the applicant returned to Miami, Florida.

3.  The applicant's WD AGO Form 53-55 shows:

	a.  he enlisted in the Regular Army on 29 July 1949;

	b.  he was assigned to Company C, 82nd Armored Reconnaissance Battalion;

	c.  he served in the European theater of operations (ETO) from 24 December 1942 to 11 June 1945;

	d.  he participated in six campaigns:

* Sicily
* Normandy
* Northern France
* Rhineland
* Ardennes-Alsace
* Central Europe

	e.  his awards consisted of the European-African-Middle Eastern Service Medal with six bronze service stars and the American Defense Service Medal;

	f.  he attained the rank of staff sergeant and was honorably discharged on 10 July 1945; and

	g.  he had 17 days of lost time.

4.  The applicant's WD AGO Form 53 (Enlisted Record and Report of Separation – Honorable Discharge) for the period ending 19 December 1949 shows:

	a.  he enlisted in the Regular Army on 2 February 1949 in the rank of sergeant;

	b.  he was awarded military occupational specialty 0766 (Radio Operator); and

	c.  he was honorably discharged on 19 December 1949.

5.  The applicant's DD Form 214 for the period ending 22 May 1951 shows:

	a.  he reenlisted in the Regular Army on 20 December 1949;

	b.  he was promoted to sergeant first class on 16 February 1951; and

	c.  he was honorably discharged on 22 May 1951.

6.  The applicant's DA Form 66 (Officer Qualification Record) last audited on 12 March 1964 shows:

	a.  he was appointed as a second lieutenant, U.S. Army Reserve (USAR), on 23 May 1951;

	b.  he served in the ETO from 15 December 1942 to 10 July 1945, in U.S. Army Europe from 17 January 1952 to 10 January 1955, in the Republic of Korea from 11 November 1957 to 23 December 1958, in Hawaii from 12 August 1960 to 28 March 1962, and in Okinawa and Thailand from 29 March 1962 to 18 March 1963;

	c.  his awards included the Army Good Conduct Medal, American Defense Service Medal, European-African-Middle Eastern Service Medal, World War II Victory Medal, Army of Occupation Medal with Germany Clasp, and National Defense Service Medal; and

	d.  on 7 March 1962, he qualified as Expert with the .30 caliber carbine rifle and as Marksman with the .45 caliber pistol;

7.  The applicant's DD Form 214 for the period ending 31 August 1964 shows:

	a.  he was ordered to active duty from the USAR on 23 May 1951;

	b.  he attained the rank of major on 30 August 1962;

	c.  his awards included the Army of Occupation Medal with Germany Clasp and the National Defense Service Medal; and

	d.  he was retired on 31 August 1964 with 20 years, 5 months, and 24 days of creditable active duty service.

8.  On 6 November 1964, this Board sent a letter to the applicant informing him that his request to delete the 17 days of lost time from his records was denied because of insufficient evidence showing an error or injustice.  On 24 June 1965, the Board sent him a second letter informing him that, as a result of a careful review, there is no material evidence of error or injustice.

9.  A review of the applicant's records indicates entitlement to additional awards and decorations that are not shown on his DD Form 214.

10.  References:

	a.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides for award of the Korea Defense Service Medal (KDSM).  It is authorized for award to members of the Armed Forces of the United States who served on active duty in support of the defense of the Republic of Korea.  The area of eligibility and the period of eligibility are as follows:  (a) service members of the Armed Forces must have served in support of the defense of the Republic of South Korea from 28 July 1954 through a future date to be determined by the Secretary of Defense; (b) the area of eligibility encompasses all land area of the Republic of South Korea and the contiguous water out to 12 nautical miles and all air spaces above the land and water areas; and (c) service members must have been mobilized with units or assigned or attached to units operating in the area of eligibility for 30 consecutive or 60 nonconsecutive days.
	b.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 states that a bronze arrowhead will be affixed to the European-African-Middle Eastern Service Medal to denote credit for an assault landing.

	c.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 states the Army Commendation Medal may be awarded to any member of the Armed Forces of the United States who, while serving in any capacity with the Army after 6 December 1941, distinguishes himself or herself by heroism, meritorious achievement, or meritorious service.  As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required.

	d.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-1 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) lists the awards received by units serving in World War II.  This pamphlet shows the 82nd Armored Reconnaissance Battalion, 2nd Armored Division, participated in the following seven campaigns:

* Algeria-French Morocco (8-11 November 1942)
* Sicily (9 July - 17 August 1943)
* Normandy (6 June-24 July 1944)
* Northern France (25 July-14 September 1944)
* Rhineland (15 September 1944-21 March 1945
* Ardennes-Alsace (16 December 1944-25 January 1945)
* Central Europe (22 March-11 May 1945)

	e.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-1 shows that War Department General Orders (WDGO) Number 84, dated 1945, awarded the 82nd Armored Reconnaissance Battalion the Distinguished Unit Citation [now known as the Presidential Unit Citation]; and WDGO Number 43, dated 1950, awarded the same unit the Belgian Fourragere.  This unit also received assault landing credit in 1943 for Sicily.

11.  Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1130, provides the legal authority for consideration of proposals for decorations not previously submitted in a timely fashion.  Upon the request of a Member of Congress, the Secretary concerned shall review a proposal for the award of or upgrading of a decoration.  Based upon such review, the Secretary shall determine the merits of approving the award.



DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his military records should be corrected:

* to show award of the Belgian Fourragere
* to show award of the PUC
* to show award of the ARCOM
* to show his service in North Africa
* to explain his lost time in 1943

2.  The evidence of record clearly shows the applicant was awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal and a bronze arrowhead device and his unit was awarded the Presidential Unit Citation and Belgian Fourragere.  Therefore, these awards should be shown on his WD AGO Form 53-55.

3.  The evidence of record clearly shows the applicant served during a qualifying period of service and was awarded the World War II Victory Medal.  Therefore, this award should be shown on his WD AGO Form 53-55.

4.  The evidence of record clearly shows the applicant served a qualifying period of service for award of the KDSM.  Therefore, this award should be shown on his DD Form 214 for the period ending 31 August 1964.

5.  The evidence of record clearly shows he qualified as Expert with the carbine rifle.  Therefore, this badge should be shown on his DD Form 214.

6.  The evidence of record clearly shows he qualified as Marksman with the pistol.  Therefore, this badge should be shown on his DD Form 214.

7.  There is no available evidence of record showing the applicant was recommended for or awarded the ARCOM.  Therefore, this portion of his application should be denied.

8.  While the available evidence is insufficient for awarding the applicant an ARCOM, this in no way affects his right to pursue his claim for the award by submitting a request through his Member of Congress under the provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1130.

9.  The evidence of record clearly shows the applicant first arrived in the ETO via Casablanca, French Morocco, in North Africa.  His arrival was shortly after completion of the Algeria-French Morocco campaign.  Therefore, this campaign was not entered on his WD AGO Form 53-55.

10.  Regarding the applicant's inquiry concerning why he lost 17 days of time in 1943, the available records show he was sentenced to confinement for a 
3-month period which was soon after suspended, resulting in lost time of 17 days.  Therefore, no correction to his records regarding this lost time is necessary.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

__X_____  ___X____  ____X___  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by:

	a.  showing that in addition to the awards already shown on his WD AGO 
Form 53-55, his awards include the Army Good Conduct Medal, World War II Victory Medal, PUC, Belgian Fourragere, and a bronze arrowhead device to be affixed to his already-awarded European-African-Middle Eastern Service Medal with six bronze service stars;

	b.  showing that in addition to the awards already shown on his DD Form 214, his awards include the KDSM, Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Carbine Bar, and Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Pistol Bar.

2.  The Board further determined the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so 


much of the application that pertains to award of the ARCOM, participation in the Algeria-French Morocco campaign, or correction with regard to his lost time in 1943.



      _______X_________________
                 CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100023059



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100023059



8


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1