IN THE CASE OF:    

		BOARD DATE:  23 July 2015	  

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140018335 


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 the record of her deceased uncle, a former service member (FSM), to show the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB), Presidential Unit Citation (PUC), American Defense Service Medal (ADSM) and the Overseas Service Bar (OSB).  She further requests, through a member of Congress, that the FSM’s rank be reflected as corporal (CPL).

2.  The applicant states:

    a.  The FSM:

* entered the service on 25 July 1941
* was involved in combat while stationed in the Philippines prior to his capture and subsequent death in 1944
* died in the line of duty
* served with the 75th Ordnance Company which was awarded the PUC
* he was killed when American troops sank a POW ship on which he was a passenger

     b.  A comrade informed the family of this injustice on 21 January 2014.

3.  The applicant provides:

* a letter from a Senator’s office
* a WD AGO Form 53-55 (Enlisted Record and Report of Separation, Honorable Discharge) pertaining to another FSM 
* excerpts of a book titled Hell’s Guest
* WD AGO Form 52-1 (Report of Death)
* excepts of the newspaper The Jamestown Sun
* a letter from the FSM
* Notification of Birth for the applicant
* obituary for the FSM’s brother
* letter from the War Department
* a personal letter
* OQMG Form 371 (Data on Remains not yet Recovered or Identified)

 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 FSM's military records are not available to the ABCMR for review.  A fire destroyed approximately 18 million service members' records at the National Personnel Records Center in 1973.  It is believed that the FSM's records were lost or destroyed in that fire.  This case is being considered using a partially reconstructed file and the documents provided by the applicant.

3.  A WD AGO Form 52-1, dated 19 June 1945 shows that the FSM entered active duty on 25 July 1941 and that he was killed in action (KIA) on                  24 October 1944.  His rank is listed as private (PVT).  The WD AGO Form 52-1 states:

     a.  The FSM was known by the War Department to have been in a beleaguered status from 8 December 1941 to 6 May 1942.  He was in an absent in a missing in action status on and subsequent to 7 May 1942 until his absence was terminated by a report from the Japanese government through the International Red Cross of his status as a prisoner of war (POW) on 18 January 1943.

     b.  The POW status was terminated in 16 June 1945 when sufficient evidence established the fact of his death by the Secretary of War.  The FSM’s death was the result of the sinking of a Japanese ship of which the FSM was a passenger in a POW status.  

4.  Records show he served as a PVT with the 75th Ordnance Depot Company.    

5.  The FSM's military service records do not contain any orders or other evidence that shows he was promoted to corporal (CPL) during the period of service under review or that he was posthumously promoted to CPL.

6.  In a letter from the FSM to his mother with a postmark of 13 November 1941, he stated he was in Manila and he was fine.  He also stated he was driving a staff car and expected to get a rating by the first of the year.

7.   A newspaper article in The Jamestown Sun, dated 17 September 2011, states that former Senator Conrad presented the FSM’s family with the following awards for his service:

* Purple Heart
* POW Medal
* Army Good Conduct Medal
* Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal with one bronze service star
* WW II Victory Medal
* Honorable Service Lapel Button

8.  The book Hell’s Guest and its excerpts provided by the applicant recounts the personal stories of Soldiers who fought in the Pacific, specifically the Philippine Islands, and their ultimate surrender by their leaders to the Japanese Army.  The book is very personal in nature and recounts the friendship of the FSM and the book’s author during their shared experience on the Bataan death march of American POWs.  The author and FSM were separated prior to the FSM’s death.
   
9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states the ADSM is awarded for service within the American theater between 8 September 1939 and   7 December 1941 under orders to active duty for a period of 12 months or longer.

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides that the PUC (known as the Distinguished Unit Citation until 3 November 1966) is awarded for extraordinary heroism in action.  A unit must display such gallantry, determination and esprit de corps in accomplishing its mission as would warrant award of the Distinguished Service Cross to an individual. 

11.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-1 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) does not show that 75th Ordnance Depot Company was awarded the Distinguished Unit Citation. 

12.  War Department Circular 269-1943 established the CIB and the Expert Infantryman Badge to recognize and provide an incentive to infantrymen.  The Expert Infantryman Badge was to be awarded for attainment of certain proficiency standards or by satisfactory performance of duty in action against the enemy.  The Combat Infantryman Badge was awarded for exemplary conduct in action against the enemy.  War Department Circular 186-1944 further provided that the Combat Infantryman Badge was to be awarded only to infantrymen serving with infantry units of brigade, regimental, or smaller size.  Additionally, World War II holders of the Combat Infantryman Badge received a monthly pay supplement known as combat infantry pay and holders of the Expert Infantryman Badge 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 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:

	a.  light machine gunner (604)

	b.  heavy machine gunner (605)

	c.  platoon sergeant (651)

	d.  squad leader (653)

	e.  rifleman (745)

	f.  automatic rifleman (746)

	g.  heavy weapons NCO (812)

	h.  gun crewman (864)

13.  Army Regulation 670-1 (Uniforms and Insignia) governs the requirements for the Overseas Service Bar.  

	a.  An Overseas Service Bar is authorized for wear for each period of active Federal service as a member of the U.S. Army outside of the continental limits of the United States for the specific time frames and areas of operation cited in Army Regulation 670-1 or appropriate Department of the Army message.  

	b.  One OSB is authorized for each 6–month period of active Federal service as a member of a U.S. Service outside CONUS, between 7 December 1941 and 2 September 1946, both dates inclusive. An overseas service bar is not authorized for a fraction of a 6-month period.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that the FSM's records should be corrected to show the ADSM, PUC, CIB, and the OSB.  She further contends that his rank should be listed as CPL.

2.  Records show the FSM was in a beleaguered status beginning 8 December 1941 and he was KIA on 24 October 1944.  During this period of 2 years, 10 months, and 16 days, he would have been authorized 5 OSBs.  Therefore, his records should be corrected to show these OSBs. 

3.  The applicant contends that her FSM's records should be corrected to show the ADSM, PUC, CIB, and the OSB.  She further contends that his rank should be listed as CPL.

4.  Records show that the FSM did not serve a qualifying period of service for award of the ADSM.  Therefore, he is not entitled to the correction of his records to show this award.

5.  Evidence shows that the FSM was assigned to 75th Ordnance Depot Company.  There is no indication that this unit was cited for award of the Distinguish Unit Citation.  Therefore, there is no basis for correcting the FSM’s records to show this unit award.

6.  There is no evidence in the available record or provided by the applicant that shows the FSM possessed a qualifying MOS or served in a qualifying position or unit for receipt of the CIB.  The discharge document of the FSM’s comrade is insufficient to change the FSM record.  As such, there is insufficient evidence to grant the CIB.

7.  The FSM's military service records do not contain any orders or other evidence that shows he was promoted to CPL during the period of service under review or that he was posthumously promoted to CPL.  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to show the FSM’s rank as CPL.

8.  This action in no way diminishes the sacrifices made by the FSM in service to our Nation.  The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of their FSM’s service in arms.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

____X___  ____X___  ____X___ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was 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 creating an appropriate document to show the OSB (5).

2.  The Board further determined that 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 correcting the FSM’s records to show his rank as CPL and showing award of the CIB, PUC, and the ADSM.




      _______ _   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)                                         AR20140018335





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140018335



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1