IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 28 January 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150005615 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, in effect, correction of his record to show he was awarded the Bronze Star Medal and promoted to technical sergeant based on his service in World War II (WWII). 2. The applicant states that: a. On 15 March 1945, Company C, 3186th Signal Service Battalion (SSB) was designated Detachment "A" and unit personnel were sent on detached service with the various signal companies in the IV, XV and XXI Corps in the 7th Army. The assignments were varied from operations to teaching the use of the radio-link equipment, the use of FM radio and conventional telephone carrier equipment to send teletype and voice messages, instead of spiral four cables. Lieutenant (LT) R____ was given the responsibility for these various units. He was a technician fourth grade (T4), in military occupational specialty (MOS) 187 and was assigned to be with him. Until the end of the war in Europe, they traveled about a day behind the infantry directing the activities of unit personnel and locating abandoned telephone central offices and determining if they could be rehabilitated. At the end of the war in Europe the applicant's name was included in letters of commendation from both the 72nd Signal Company Commander and the 74th Signal Company Commander for work he had done for them. At that time, quite a few of the officers and enlisted men were transferred to other duties or left for the U. S. for discharge. b. He then went to Marseilles to wait for transport to the Pacific theater and the pending invasion of Japan. He arrived in Manila in August and then went up to Lingayen Gulf, to a beach area south of San Fernando, where they prepared to go to Japan. While there, their company was assigned four prime movers with low bed trailers and four D7 bulldozers. No one had any training in the use of this equipment. His rank was changed from technician third grade (T3) to sergeant (SGT) or T4 and he had the responsibility to get the new equipment in service and train people in its use. When they picked up the equipment, it was all in wooden shipping containers. Once they had the first one uncrated, we found that the D7 was assembled and ready to run but they had to install the blade assembly. This was before hydraulics and the blade was operated by a rear winch and cable system running on an "A frame" over the D7. The first one took about 3 days to assemble and get running, the next three about a day and a half each. None of them knew how to operate the equipment but after about a week, with the help of the service manuals, he was able to teach four operators how to start and operate the D7's, drive the prime movers and low beds and load and unload the D7's on to the low beds. Once the equipment was operational, he was placed in permanent charge of the heavy equipment and operators. c. They soon went to Japan and were stationed between Kobe and Osaka. While there, the equipment was first used to remove and destroy aircraft at the Osaka airport and following that they worked with the Corps of Engineers primarily employed as "pusher cats" for their dump bottom scrapers. He was told by their motor officer that he would be given recognition for his efforts and a promotion to technical sergeant (grade 2). He met LT R____ on the troop transport back to the United States and he mentioned that the applicant was put in for the Bronze Star Medal for merit. This apparently never happened or was lost as they had a large rapid turnover in personnel at that time. d. Several months ago, he was talking with a fellow WWII Soldier and he mentioned that some ex-WWII service personnel, having experiences similar to the applicant's, had eventually received recognition for their service and suggested he apply. He is now 90, and it doesn't mean that much to him, but his children and grandchildren might get a kick out of it if he was to receive something. 3. The applicant provides copies of letters from the commanding officers of the 72nd Signal Company and 74th Signal Company commending personnel of the 3186th SSB for their performance. The applicant's name is listed in both letters. 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 53-55 (Enlisted Record and Report of Separation Honorable Discharge) shows he was inducted into the Army of the United States on 24 June 1943 and entered active duty at Binghamton, New York, on 8 July 1943. This form also shows at the time of separation he held military occupational specialty 187 (Repeaterman) and he was assigned to the 3186th SSB. His grade is shown as staff sergeant (SSG). 3. His WD AGO 53-55 also shows he departed the Continental United States (CONUS) on 1 December 1944 and he arrived in the European Theater of Operations (ETO) on 14 December 1944. He departed the ETO on 22 August 1945 and arrived in the Western Pacific Theater of Operations (WPTO) on 28 August 1945. He departed the WPTO on 27 January 1946 and arrived in CONUS on 7 February 1946. 4. He completed 1 year, 5 months and 3 days of CONUS service and 1 year, 2 months and 7 days of foreign service. He was honorably discharged by reason of demobilization on 17 February 1946. His WD AGO Form 53-55 also shows in: * Item 32 (Battles and Campaigns) he participated in the following campaigns during WWII -- Central Europe and Rhineland * Item 33 (Decorations and Citations) shows the – * American Services Medal * Good Conduct Medal * World War II Victory Medal * European-African Middle Eastern Campaign Medal * Asiatic Pacific Service Medal 5. His WD AGO Form 24 (Service Record) shows his promotions as – * Private (Grade 7), 24 June 1943 * Private First Class (Grade 6), 1 September 1944 * Technician 5th Grade, 9 November 1944 * Technician 4th Grade, 3 December 1944 * Technician 3rd Grade, 23 August 1945 * SSG (Grade 3), 4 January 1946 6. There is no indication in the available record that he was recommended for or received any a promotion to technical sergeant (Grade 2). 7. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides for award of the Bronze Star Medal. The Bronze Star Medal is awarded to members of the Armed Forces who, after 6 December 1941 and prior to 3 September 1945, were cited in orders or in a formal certificate for meritorious or exemplary conduct in ground combat against the armed enemy. A citation in orders for the Combat Infantryman Badge or Combat Medical Badge awarded in the field during the period of actual combat against the armed enemy is considered as a citation for exemplary conduct in ground combat. As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required. 8. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1130 (10 USC 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. 9. The request, with a DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award), must be submitted through a Member of Congress to: Commander, U.S. Army Human Resources Command, ATTN: AHRC-PDP-A, 1600 Spearhead Division Avenue, Fort Knox, KY 40122. The unit must be clearly identified, along with the period of assignment and the recommended award. A narrative of the actions or period for which recognition is being requested must accompany the DA Form 638. Requests should be supported by sworn affidavits, eyewitness statements, certificates, and related documents. Supporting evidence is best provided by commanders, leaders, and fellow Soldiers who had personal knowledge of the facts relative to the request. The burden and costs for researching and assembling supporting documentation rest with the applicant. 10. Army Regulation 615-5 (Appointment and Reduction of NCOs and PFCs), in effect at the time, governed the appointment and reduction of noncommissioned officers and privates first class. In pertinent part, it stated that the commanding officer of a unit to which an allotment of grades was authorized by the War Department would determine and sub allot a definite proportion to his subordinate commanders authorized to make appointments. It also stated that noncommissioned officers appointed during an emergency under special authorization of the War Department would be temporary appointments. In order to provide an opportunity to observe the performance of candidates for higher grades, unit commanders were authorized to exceed their authorized allotments in any grade by the number of vacancies that existed in a higher grade pending the promotion of the best-qualified candidate(s). Depending on the type of unit, the company, battalion or regimental commander was the appointment authority DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. There is no available evidence showing the applicant received any promotions other than those listed in his service record and DD Form 214. 2. There is no evidence in the applicant's records to show he was recommended for or awarded the Bronze Star Medal. The governing Army regulation states that for personal decorations (which include the Bronze Star Medal) formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required. 3. Nevertheless, while the available evidence is insufficient for awarding the applicant a Bronze Star Medal, this in no way affects his right to pursue his claim for the Bronze Star Medal by submitting a request through his Member of Congress under the provisions of 10 USC 1130. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ___x____ ___x____ ____x___ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 1. The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. 2. The Board wants the applicant and all others concerned to know this action in no way diminishes the sacrifices made by him in service to our Nation. The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of his service in arms. __________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) AR20150004546 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150005615 6 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1