MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           21 February 2002    
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001058976    

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. W. W. Osborn, Jr.		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. George D. Paxson		Chairperson	
	Mr. Thomas A. Pagan		Member	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
		 Records

	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
		 advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  Reconsideration of the former service member’s (FSM) earlier appeal to correct his military records by awarding him the Combat Infantryman Badge and the Purple Heart. 

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that a 28 March 1952 letter from the FSM’s division commander substantiates that he was entitled to the Combat Infantryman Badge.  On behalf of the FSM, his nephew writes that these awards are very important to his uncle.  He does not understand why the veterans’ service officer did not include the general’s letter in the first place.

NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION:  Incorporated herein by reference are military records that were summarized in a decisional document prepared to reflect the Board's previous consideration of the case (AR2001050726) on 27 March 2001.

The submitted letter is new evidence that requires Board consideration.

The letter to the FSM reads:

I sincerely congratulate you upon successful completion of the Second Infantry Division Squad Leaders’ School.  

The School has two major purposes: First, to develop your natural leadership qualities; and second, to impart much technical military information which will be useful while in command of any unit in combat.

You were selected by your Regimental Commander as one who can develop into an outstanding leader.  This is a goal that is desirable of attainment in either the military or in civilian life.  We hope the School will help you toward that end.

The tactical principles and techniques that were included in your course of instruction should be regarded as fundamental guides.  They are not rules to be applied blindly.  Each new situation will require an intelligent application of these principles to fit the specific mission, terrain, and enemy situation.  There have been no tests or graded exercises in this course.  The real test will come when you apply what has been learned in combat.

I extend best wishes for continued success upon your return to your unit and throughout your career. 

A health record research project, commonly referred to as the "SGO Files", involved transposing the hospital admission card data from the periods of World War II and the Korean conflict onto magnetic tape.  In 1988 the National Research Council made these tape files available to the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC).  The availability of the information to the NPRC received considerable publicity by the various veteran service organizations.  It was widely believed that these tapes would become a valuable substitute for the records lost in the NPRC fire of 1973.  It is estimated that the SGO files document 95 percent of all hospitalized battle casualties from World War II and the Korean War.   Searches of these files fail to show that the FSM was wounded or injured as a result of enemy action.

Army Regulation 600-8-22 and the awards regulation in effect at that time both provided three basic requirements for award of the CIB.  The soldier must be an infantryman satisfactorily performing infantry duties, he must be assigned to an infantry unit during such time as the unit is engaged in active ground combat, and he must actively participate in such ground combat.  Specific requirements state, in effect, that an Army enlisted soldier must be have an infantry or special forces specialty, satisfactorily performed duty while assigned or attached as a member of an infantry, ranger or special forces unit of brigade, regimental, or smaller size during any period such unit was engaged in active ground combat.  

Army Regulation 15-185 sets forth the policy and procedures for the ABCMR.  It provides that, if a request for reconsideration is received within one year of the prior consideration and the case has not been previously reconsidered, it will be resubmitted to the Board if there is evidence that was not in the record at the time of the Board’s prior consideration.  This includes but is not limited to any facts or arguments as to why relief should be granted.  The staff of the Board is authorized to determine whether or not such evidence has been submitted.

The regulation provides further guidance for reconsideration requests that are received more than one year after the Board’s original consideration or after the Board has already reconsidered the case.  In such cases, the staff of the Board will review the request to determine if substantial relevant evidence has been submitted that shows fraud, mistake in law, mathematical miscalculation, manifest error, or if there exists substantial relevant new evidence discovered contemporaneously with or within a short time after the Board’s original decision.  If the staff finds such evidence, the case will be resubmitted to the Board.  If no such evidence is found, the application will be returned without action.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  The submitted letter does nothing to show that the FSM met any of the requirements for the Combat Infantryman Badge.  The infantry division would have had soldiers of many specialties; including, drivers, clerks, artillerymen, quartermasters and engineers.   The school is not even described as an “infantry” school.

2.  The submitted document does not address the question of entitlement to the Purple Heart.

3.  The SGO Files fail to show that the FSM sustained an injury while in action against the enemy or as the result of enemy action.

4.  The overall merits of the case, including the latest submissions and arguments, are insufficient as a basis for the Board to reverse its previous decision.

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the FSM's request.

DETERMINATION:  The FSM has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

_GDP___  __TAP___  ___MHM  DENY APPLICATION

	Carl W. S. Chun
    Director, Army Board for Correction 
	of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001058976	
SUFFIX		
RECON	This applies only to ADRB	
DATE BOARDED	20020221	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	 	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION		
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.