PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           15 November 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001060990

	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.  

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. William Blakely		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright		Chairperson	
	Mr. Stanley Kelley		Member	
	Ms. Karen A. Heinz		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                            records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	                  advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests, in effect, that his military records be corrected to show the rank and pay grade of technical sergeant (TSGT) and that he be recognized for wounds received in action during combat operations.

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was reduced from TSGT to private first class (PFC) for not saluting an officer and that this reduction in rank was too severe a penalty for this offense.  He also states that he was not recognized for being wounded while fighting an enemy tank.  In support of his application, he submits the following documents:  a certificate of training; Authorization For Issuance Of Awards (DA Form 1577); Enlisted Record and Report of Separation (WD AGO Form 53-55); Separation Qualification Record (WD AGO Form 100); Promotion Certificate (WD AGO Form 58); an article published in the
Express-Times, New Jersey Edition; and associated military documents.

4.  The applicant’s military records were lost or destroyed in the fire that occurred at the National Personnel Records Center in 1973.  The information herein was gleaned from a copy of the applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-55 and other military documents provided.

5.  The applicant’s separation document shows he enlisted in the Army of the United States on 6 April 1942 and served on active duty until being honorably separated on 21 March 1946.  This document also shows that on the date of his separation he held the rank of PFC.  The separation document also confirms he was trained as rifleman and served overseas 11 months and 12 days.  In addition, it lists the following awards he earned during his active duty tenure: American Theatre Ribbon; Purple Heart (PH); Good Conduct Medal; Combat Infantryman Badge; Expert Infantryman Badge; World War II Victory Medal; and European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal with two bronze stars. 

6.  Item 3 (Grade) of the applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-55 contains the entry PFC, confirming that this was the rank he held on the date of his separation.  Item 38 (Highest Grade Held) has the entry T/SGT, which verifies that this was the highest grade he attained while serving on active duty. 

7.  On 30 April 1992, an Authorization for Issuance of Awards (DA Form 1577) was published by the Army Reserve Personnel Center (ARPERCEN), St. Louis, Missouri, which authorized the applicant the Bronze Star Medal based on his being awarded the CIB during World War II.  

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 prescribes the policy and procedures for military awards and it provides, in pertinent part, that the (PH) is awarded for a wound sustained as a result of hostile action.  Substantiating evidence must be provided to verify that the wound was the result of hostile action; the wound required medical treatment by military medical personnel; and that the medical treatment for the wound for which the PH is being awarded was made a matter of official record.

9.  Paragraph 3-12 of the awards regulation contains guidance on awarding the BSM.  It states, in pertinent part, that BSM is awarded for heroism and for meritorious achievement or service in military operations against an armed enemy and authorizes the award of the BSM for members who were cited in orders or awarded a certificate for exemplary conduct in ground combat between 7 December 1941 and 2 September 1945.  For this purpose, a CIB is considered to be a citation in orders which means, in effect, that the BSM is authorized to any individual who received the CIB during World War II.

10.  Paragraph 6-3, states, in pertinent part, that the bronze oak leaf cluster is awarded to denote the second and succeeding awards of a certain decorations, among them the PH.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The WD AGO Form 53-55 issued to and verified by the applicant with his signature on the date of his separation does confirm that the highest rank he attained while on active duty was T/SGT.  However, it also clearly establishes that the applicant held the rank of PFC on the date of his separation.  

2.  While the Board wishes to congratulate the applicant on his outstanding World War II service, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board must presume government regularity in the process that resulted in his reduction from T/SGT to PFC.  Therefore, it is compelled to conclude that this reduction was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations in effect at the time and finds insufficient evidence to warrant supporting the requested relief.

3. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was awarded the PH for wounds received as a result of hostile action.  However, there is no evidence that supports his claim of entitlement to a second award of the PH based on a wound he received while fighting a tank.  Therefore, based on the lack of evidence, the Board is compelled to deny the applicant’s request for a second award of the PH.

4.  During the review of this case, the Board discovered that in 1992 the Army awarded the applicant the BSM based on his having earned the CIB during World War II.  However, this award has not been added to his separation document.  Therefore, the Board concludes it would be appropriate to add this award to his records at this time. 

5.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by issuing the individual concerned a corrected separation document that includes the BSM he earned for exemplary conduct in ground combat during World War II. 

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

________  ________  ________  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001060990	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2001/11/15	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	PARTIAL RELIEF (GRANT)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	129.0600	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.		

PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           15 November 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001060990

	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.  

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. William Blakely		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright		Chairperson	
	Mr. Stanley Kelley		Member	
	Ms. Karen A. Heinz		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                            records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	                  advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests, in effect, that his military records be corrected to show the rank and pay grade of technical sergeant (TSGT) and that he be recognized for wounds received in action during combat operations.

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was reduced from TSGT to private first class (PFC) for not saluting an officer and that this reduction in rank was too severe a penalty for this offense.  He also states that he was not recognized for being wounded while fighting an enemy tank.  In support of his application, he submits the following documents:  a certificate of training; Authorization For Issuance Of Awards (DA Form 1577); Enlisted Record and Report of Separation (WD AGO Form 53-55); Separation Qualification Record (WD AGO Form 100); Promotion Certificate (WD AGO Form 58); an article published in the
Express-Times, New Jersey Edition; and associated military documents.

4.  The applicant’s military records were lost or destroyed in the fire that occurred at the National Personnel Records Center in 1973.  The information herein was gleaned from a copy of the applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-55 and other military documents provided.

5.  The applicant’s separation document shows he enlisted in the Army of the United States on 6 April 1942 and served on active duty until being honorably separated on 21 March 1946.  This document also shows that on the date of his separation he held the rank of PFC.  The separation document also confirms he was trained as rifleman and served overseas 11 months and 12 days.  In addition, it lists the following awards he earned during his active duty tenure: American Theatre Ribbon; Purple Heart (PH); Good Conduct Medal; Combat Infantryman Badge; Expert Infantryman Badge; World War II Victory Medal; and European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal with two bronze stars. 

6.  Item 3 (Grade) of the applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-55 contains the entry PFC, confirming that this was the rank he held on the date of his separation.  Item 38 (Highest Grade Held) has the entry T/SGT, which verifies that this was the highest grade he attained while serving on active duty. 

7.  On 30 April 1992, an Authorization for Issuance of Awards (DA Form 1577) was published by the Army Reserve Personnel Center (ARPERCEN), St. Louis, Missouri, which authorized the applicant the Bronze Star Medal based on his being awarded the CIB during World War II.  

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 prescribes the policy and procedures for military awards and it provides, in pertinent part, that the (PH) is awarded for a wound sustained as a result of hostile action.  Substantiating evidence must be provided to verify that the wound was the result of hostile action; the wound required medical treatment by military medical personnel; and that the medical treatment for the wound for which the PH is being awarded was made a matter of official record.

9.  Paragraph 3-12 of the awards regulation contains guidance on awarding the BSM.  It states, in pertinent part, that BSM is awarded for heroism and for meritorious achievement or service in military operations against an armed enemy and authorizes the award of the BSM for members who were cited in orders or awarded a certificate for exemplary conduct in ground combat between 7 December 1941 and 2 September 1945.  For this purpose, a CIB is considered to be a citation in orders which means, in effect, that the BSM is authorized to any individual who received the CIB during World War II.

10.  Paragraph 6-3, states, in pertinent part, that the bronze oak leaf cluster is awarded to denote the second and succeeding awards of a certain decorations, among them the PH.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The WD AGO Form 53-55 issued to and verified by the applicant with his signature on the date of his separation does confirm that the highest rank he attained while on active duty was T/SGT.  However, it also clearly establishes that the applicant held the rank of PFC on the date of his separation.  

2.  While the Board wishes to congratulate the applicant on his outstanding World War II service, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board must presume government regularity in the process that resulted in his reduction from T/SGT to PFC.  Therefore, it is compelled to conclude that this reduction was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations in effect at the time and finds insufficient evidence to warrant supporting the requested relief.

3. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was awarded the PH for wounds received as a result of hostile action.  However, there is no evidence that supports his claim of entitlement to a second award of the PH based on a wound he received while fighting a tank.  Therefore, based on the lack of evidence, the Board is compelled to deny the applicant’s request for a second award of the PH.

4.  During the review of this case, the Board discovered that in 1992 the Army awarded the applicant the BSM based on his having earned the CIB during World War II.  However, this award has not been added to his separation document.  Therefore, the Board concludes it would be appropriate to add this award to his records at this time. 

5.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by issuing the individual concerned a corrected separation document that includes the BSM he earned for exemplary conduct in ground combat during World War II. 

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

________  ________  ________  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001060990	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2001/11/15	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	PARTIAL RELIEF (GRANT)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	129.0600	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.		

PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           15 November 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001060990

	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.  

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. William Blakely		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright		Chairperson	
	Mr. Stanley Kelley		Member	
	Ms. Karen A. Heinz		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                            records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	                  advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests, in effect, that his military records be corrected to show the rank and pay grade of technical sergeant (TSGT) and that he be recognized for wounds received in action during combat operations.

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was reduced from TSGT to private first class (PFC) for not saluting an officer and that this reduction in rank was too severe a penalty for this offense.  He also states that he was not recognized for being wounded while fighting an enemy tank.  In support of his application, he submits the following documents:  a certificate of training; Authorization For Issuance Of Awards (DA Form 1577); Enlisted Record and Report of Separation (WD AGO Form 53-55); Separation Qualification Record (WD AGO Form 100); Promotion Certificate (WD AGO Form 58); an article published in the
Express-Times, New Jersey Edition; and associated military documents.

4.  The applicant’s military records were lost or destroyed in the fire that occurred at the National Personnel Records Center in 1973.  The information herein was gleaned from a copy of the applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-55 and other military documents provided.

5.  The applicant’s separation document shows he enlisted in the Army of the United States on 6 April 1942 and served on active duty until being honorably separated on 21 March 1946.  This document also shows that on the date of his separation he held the rank of PFC.  The separation document also confirms he was trained as rifleman and served overseas 11 months and 12 days.  In addition, it lists the following awards he earned during his active duty tenure: American Theatre Ribbon; Purple Heart (PH); Good Conduct Medal; Combat Infantryman Badge; Expert Infantryman Badge; World War II Victory Medal; and European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal with two bronze stars. 

6.  Item 3 (Grade) of the applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-55 contains the entry PFC, confirming that this was the rank he held on the date of his separation.  Item 38 (Highest Grade Held) has the entry T/SGT, which verifies that this was the highest grade he attained while serving on active duty. 

7.  On 30 April 1992, an Authorization for Issuance of Awards (DA Form 1577) was published by the Army Reserve Personnel Center (ARPERCEN), St. Louis, Missouri, which authorized the applicant the Bronze Star Medal based on his being awarded the CIB during World War II.  

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 prescribes the policy and procedures for military awards and it provides, in pertinent part, that the (PH) is awarded for a wound sustained as a result of hostile action.  Substantiating evidence must be provided to verify that the wound was the result of hostile action; the wound required medical treatment by military medical personnel; and that the medical treatment for the wound for which the PH is being awarded was made a matter of official record.

9.  Paragraph 3-12 of the awards regulation contains guidance on awarding the BSM.  It states, in pertinent part, that BSM is awarded for heroism and for meritorious achievement or service in military operations against an armed enemy and authorizes the award of the BSM for members who were cited in orders or awarded a certificate for exemplary conduct in ground combat between 7 December 1941 and 2 September 1945.  For this purpose, a CIB is considered to be a citation in orders which means, in effect, that the BSM is authorized to any individual who received the CIB during World War II.

10.  Paragraph 6-3, states, in pertinent part, that the bronze oak leaf cluster is awarded to denote the second and succeeding awards of a certain decorations, among them the PH.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The WD AGO Form 53-55 issued to and verified by the applicant with his signature on the date of his separation does confirm that the highest rank he attained while on active duty was T/SGT.  However, it also clearly establishes that the applicant held the rank of PFC on the date of his separation.  

2.  While the Board wishes to congratulate the applicant on his outstanding World War II service, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board must presume government regularity in the process that resulted in his reduction from T/SGT to PFC.  Therefore, it is compelled to conclude that this reduction was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations in effect at the time and finds insufficient evidence to warrant supporting the requested relief.

3. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was awarded the PH for wounds received as a result of hostile action.  However, there is no evidence that supports his claim of entitlement to a second award of the PH based on a wound he received while fighting a tank.  Therefore, based on the lack of evidence, the Board is compelled to deny the applicant’s request for a second award of the PH.

4.  During the review of this case, the Board discovered that in 1992 the Army awarded the applicant the BSM based on his having earned the CIB during World War II.  However, this award has not been added to his separation document.  Therefore, the Board concludes it would be appropriate to add this award to his records at this time. 

5.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by issuing the individual concerned a corrected separation document that includes the BSM he earned for exemplary conduct in ground combat during World War II. 

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

________  ________  ________  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001060990	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2001/11/15	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	PARTIAL RELIEF (GRANT)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	129.0600	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.		

PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           15 November 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001060990

	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.  

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. William Blakely		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright		Chairperson	
	Mr. Stanley Kelley		Member	
	Ms. Karen A. Heinz		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                            records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	                  advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests, in effect, that his military records be corrected to show the rank and pay grade of technical sergeant (TSGT) and that he be recognized for wounds received in action during combat operations.

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was reduced from TSGT to private first class (PFC) for not saluting an officer and that this reduction in rank was too severe a penalty for this offense.  He also states that he was not recognized for being wounded while fighting an enemy tank.  In support of his application, he submits the following documents:  a certificate of training; Authorization For Issuance Of Awards (DA Form 1577); Enlisted Record and Report of Separation (WD AGO Form 53-55); Separation Qualification Record (WD AGO Form 100); Promotion Certificate (WD AGO Form 58); an article published in the
Express-Times, New Jersey Edition; and associated military documents.

4.  The applicant’s military records were lost or destroyed in the fire that occurred at the National Personnel Records Center in 1973.  The information herein was gleaned from a copy of the applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-55 and other military documents provided.

5.  The applicant’s separation document shows he enlisted in the Army of the United States on 6 April 1942 and served on active duty until being honorably separated on 21 March 1946.  This document also shows that on the date of his separation he held the rank of PFC.  The separation document also confirms he was trained as rifleman and served overseas 11 months and 12 days.  In addition, it lists the following awards he earned during his active duty tenure: American Theatre Ribbon; Purple Heart (PH); Good Conduct Medal; Combat Infantryman Badge; Expert Infantryman Badge; World War II Victory Medal; and European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal with two bronze stars. 

6.  Item 3 (Grade) of the applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-55 contains the entry PFC, confirming that this was the rank he held on the date of his separation.  Item 38 (Highest Grade Held) has the entry T/SGT, which verifies that this was the highest grade he attained while serving on active duty. 

7.  On 30 April 1992, an Authorization for Issuance of Awards (DA Form 1577) was published by the Army Reserve Personnel Center (ARPERCEN), St. Louis, Missouri, which authorized the applicant the Bronze Star Medal based on his being awarded the CIB during World War II.  

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 prescribes the policy and procedures for military awards and it provides, in pertinent part, that the (PH) is awarded for a wound sustained as a result of hostile action.  Substantiating evidence must be provided to verify that the wound was the result of hostile action; the wound required medical treatment by military medical personnel; and that the medical treatment for the wound for which the PH is being awarded was made a matter of official record.

9.  Paragraph 3-12 of the awards regulation contains guidance on awarding the BSM.  It states, in pertinent part, that BSM is awarded for heroism and for meritorious achievement or service in military operations against an armed enemy and authorizes the award of the BSM for members who were cited in orders or awarded a certificate for exemplary conduct in ground combat between 7 December 1941 and 2 September 1945.  For this purpose, a CIB is considered to be a citation in orders which means, in effect, that the BSM is authorized to any individual who received the CIB during World War II.

10.  Paragraph 6-3, states, in pertinent part, that the bronze oak leaf cluster is awarded to denote the second and succeeding awards of a certain decorations, among them the PH.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The WD AGO Form 53-55 issued to and verified by the applicant with his signature on the date of his separation does confirm that the highest rank he attained while on active duty was T/SGT.  However, it also clearly establishes that the applicant held the rank of PFC on the date of his separation.  

2.  While the Board wishes to congratulate the applicant on his outstanding World War II service, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board must presume government regularity in the process that resulted in his reduction from T/SGT to PFC.  Therefore, it is compelled to conclude that this reduction was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations in effect at the time and finds insufficient evidence to warrant supporting the requested relief.

3. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was awarded the PH for wounds received as a result of hostile action.  However, there is no evidence that supports his claim of entitlement to a second award of the PH based on a wound he received while fighting a tank.  Therefore, based on the lack of evidence, the Board is compelled to deny the applicant’s request for a second award of the PH.

4.  During the review of this case, the Board discovered that in 1992 the Army awarded the applicant the BSM based on his having earned the CIB during World War II.  However, this award has not been added to his separation document.  Therefore, the Board concludes it would be appropriate to add this award to his records at this time. 

5.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by issuing the individual concerned a corrected separation document that includes the BSM he earned for exemplary conduct in ground combat during World War II. 

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

__INW___  ___SK__  __KAH___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		__Irene N. Wheelwright__
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001060990	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2001/11/15	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	PARTIAL RELIEF (GRANT)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	129.0600	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.