PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:     

	BOARD DATE:           3 June 2003                           
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2003083510

	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. Joann H. Langston		Chairperson	
	Ms. Jennifer L. Prater		Member	
	Mr. Paul M. Smith		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 he earned three Purple Hearts (PHs), two Presidential Unit Citations (PUC), Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB), Expert Infantryman Badge (EIB), and Meritorious Unit Commendation (MUC).

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that his separation document (WD AGO Form 53-55) should show that he earned the following awards:  three PHs for wounds he received in action on 6 June 1944, 2 July 1944, and 16 September 1944; two PUCs; CIB; EIB; and MUC.  In support of his application, he provides the enclosed Statement in Support of Claim (VA Form 21-4138), in which he outlines a history of his service in the European Theater of Operations (ETO) during World War II.  He also provides a copy of his separation document (WD AGO Form 53-55) and three Authorization for Issuance of Awards (DA Forms 1577), issued by the Department of the Army (DA), Army Reserve Personnel Center (ARPERCEN), St. Louis, Missouri, dated 10 March 1986, 20 January 1989, and 28 May 1991. 

4.  The applicant’s military records were not available to the Board for review.  A fire destroyed approximately 18 million service members’ records at the National Personnel Records Center in 1973.  It is believed that the applicant’s records were lost in that fire.  However, there were sufficient documents remaining in a reconstructed record for the Board to conduct a fair and impartial review of this case.  

5.  The applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-55 shows that he was inducted into the Army and entered active duty on 7 July 1943.  He continuously served on active duty until being honorably separated, in the rank of private first class (PFC), on 
6 December 1945.  This document also shows that he served overseas in the ETO and participated in the Normandy and the Northern France campaigns of World War II.  

6.  Item 33 (Decorations and Citations) of the applicant’s separation document lists the following awards he earned during his tenure on active duty:  Good Conduct Medal; PH; PUC; and World War II Victory Medal.  Item 34 (Wounds Received in Action) contains the entry “2 Jul 44 France”, which confirms that 
he was wounded in action on that date at that location.  In addition, Item 
55 (Remarks) lists the European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal with 
2 bronze service stars as an earned award. 

7.  Item 31 (Military Qualifications) of the applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-55 contains the entry “None” and the documents contained in his reconstructed record give no indication that he ever completed the qualifications for or was awarded the EIB.  Further, the available documents fail to show he was wounded in action on either 6 June or 16 September 1944. 
8.  The applicant’s reconstructed record shows that on 28 May 1991, DA, ARPERCEN, issued a correction to the applicant’s separation document
(DD Form 215), which added the CIB and Bronze Star Medal to the list of authorized awards earned by the applicant during his tenure on active duty.  

9.  In the processing of this case, the unit historical files of the applicant’s unit (116th Infantry Regiment, 29th Infantry Division) that are maintained at the National Archives, College Park, Maryland, were reviewed to determine if the applicant’s contentions could be supported by the unit records.  This search produced a copy of General Orders Number 8, dated 7 July 1944, issued by Headquarters, 186th General Hospital, which awarded the applicant the PH for wounds received as a result of enemy action in France on 2 July 1944, which confirms the information already contained in his separation document.  The unit historical files contained no confirmation that the applicant was wounded in action on either 6 June or 16 September 1944.  

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 prescribes the policy for the Army awards program.  Paragraph 2-8 contains the policy for awarding the PH and it states, in pertinent part, that to support the award of the PH, there must be evidence to show that wound for which the award is being made was sustained as a result of hostile action, the wound must have required treatment, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.  

11.  Paragraph 5-12 of the awards regulation contains guidance on the European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal and it states, in pertinent part, that a bronze service star is authorized for each campaign a member participated in while serving in the ETO and a bronze arrowhead is authorized to denote participation in an assault landing.  

12.  Paragraph 7-13 of the awards regulation provides, in pertinent part, that the Presidential Unit Citation (known as the Distinguished Unit Citation until 3 November 1966) is awarded to units 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.  

13.  Paragraph 8-8 of the awards regulation provides for award of the Expert Infantryman Badge (EIB).  Award of the EIB requires that an individual must have satisfactorily completed the prescribed proficiency tests while assigned or attached to an infantry unit of at least battalion size.  

14.  Paragraph 9-21 of the awards regulation provides for award of the French Fourragere as an approved foreign unit award.  The French Fourragere was awarded by the French Government when a unit had been cited twice for award of the French Croix de Guerre.  Award of the fourragere is not automatic and requires a decree by the French government.  

15.  DA Pamphlet 672-1 (Unit Campaign Participation Credit Register-World War II) establishes the eligibility of individual members for campaign participation credit, assault landing credit, foreign unit awards, occupation credit and unit citation badges awarded during World War II.  It contains a by unit listing that confirms what credit and awards every unit received during its World War II service.  This publication confirms that during his tenure of assignment, the applicant’s unit (116th Infantry Regiment, 29th Infantry Division) was credited with participating in three campaigns and it received assault landing credit for the Normandy landing for the period 6-7 June 1944.  

16.  DA Pamphlet 672-1 also confirms that during his assignment tenure, the applicant’s unit earned two PUCs and two French Croix de Guerre; however, there is no indication that the French government issued a decree awarding the French Fourragere to the unit.  The only MUC earned by the applicant’s unit was awarded only to its Service Company, for the period 18 April to 18 September 1944, the applicant’s unit, Company A, did not receive this award.  

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Board notes the applicant’s contention that his military records should be corrected to show he earned three PH for wounds he received on 6 June 1944, 
2 July 1944, and 16 September 1944.  By regulation, in order to support awarding a member the PH, it is necessary to establish that a member was wounded or injured in action, that he wound required medical treatment, and that this medical treatment was made a matter of official record.  

2.  The available evidence confirms that the applicant was awarded the PH for wounds received in action on 2 July 1944.  However, there is no evidence to show he was wounded in action on 6 June or 16 September 1944.  As a result, the Board finds there is insufficient evidence to support additional awards of the PH in this case.  The veracity of the applicant’s claim of entitlement to two additional PHs is not in question.  However, based on the lack of evidence that satisfies the regulatory burden of proof for award of the PH, the Board is compelled to deny the request for additional PHs in the interest of all those who served during World War II and who faced similar circumstances. 

3.  The available evidence also fails to show that the applicant ever completed the requirements for or was awarded the EIB.  Thus, the Board finds no evidentiary basis to support adding this award to his record.  However, a 
DD Form 215 issued by DA in 1991 does confirms that he earned the CIB and Bronze Star Medal, which have already been added to his record.  A copy of this document is enclosed for the applicant’s use.  

4.  DA Pamphlet 672-1 confirms that during his assignment tenure, the applicant’s unit was credited with participating in three campaigns and received assault landing credit.  As a result, the applicant is entitled to 3 bronze service stars and a bronze arrowhead with his European-African-Middle Easter Campaign Medal.  Also during his assignment tenure, the applicant’s unit earned two PUCs and two French Croix de Guerre.  Thus, the Board concludes that it would also be appropriate to add these awards to his record at this time. 

5.  However, DA Pamphlet 672-1 does not confirm the applicant’s entitlement to the MUC.  It shows that the only MUC earned by the applicant’s unit was awarded to its Service Company, the applicant’s unit (Company A) did not receive this award.  

6.  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 showing that based on his unit service in the ETO during World War II, the individual concerned is entitled to two Presidential Unit Citations, two awards of the French Croix de Guerre, and three bronze service stars and a bronze arrowhead with his European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal; and by providing him a corrected separation document that reflects these changes.

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

BOARD VOTE:  

__JHL  _JLP_  __PMS      GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ______ _____  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ______ _____  DENY APPLICATION

		Joann H. Langston
		 CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003083510	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	YYYYMMDD	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	Partial Relief	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1. 61 	107.0015	
2. 158	107.0112	
3.  80	107.0034	
4.		
5.		
6.