MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            9 February 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR1999031998

	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.

	Ms. Joyce A. Wright		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Ms. Deborah S. Jacobs		Member	
	Ms. Carol Jo Suiter		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:  In effect, correction of his official medical records to show his left eye sight as 20/200 instead of 20/100.  He also requested correction of his WD AGO Form 53-55 (Enlisted Record and Report of Separation) to show that he served in the 75th Infantry Division and to show that he was awarded the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that his eyesight in his left eye was changed from 20/200 to 20/100 which put him in a 1-A category (Draft Category) with unlimited service.  He also states that his WD AGO Form 53-55 does not show that he served in the 75th Infantry Division or was awarded the CIB.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records were lost or destroyed in the National Personnel Records Center fire of 1973.  Records available to the Board were obtained from alternate sources and show he was inducted on 7 September 1944 as a teletype operator (237).  He served in the European-African-Middle Eastern Theater of Operation from 7 February 1945 to 8 July 1946 and was honorably discharged on 23 July 1946.

The applicant’s medical records are unavailable for review by this Board.

The applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-55 shows that he was assigned to 
Company A, 13th Signal Service Battalion during World War II.

His discharge document does not show the CIB as an authorized award.

There is no indication in the available records that show he was awarded an infantry military occupational specialty (MOS), that he served in an infantry duty position or that he was awarded the CIB.  

The applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-55 shows that, while in the European-African-Middle Eastern Theater, he served as a teletype operator in MOS number (237) with Company A, 13th Signal Service Battalion.

War Department Circular 269-1943 established the Combat Infantryman Badge 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 Awards Branch, Total Army Personnel 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)

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 Army Board for Correction of Military Records was created to correct errors and injustices in the military records of both active duty and former active service members.  It is not the policy of the Board to create or alter service medical records.  Such records merely reflect the observations and opinions of medical examiners at the time they were recorded.  Your official medical records were prepared by competent medical authority in your presence prior to your separation from the service.  There is no compelling evidence that an error occurred in your case.  Therefore, there is no basis for altering the applicant’s medical records.

2.  There is no evidence in the available records to show that he served in the 
75th Infantry Division.  Evidence of record shows that he was assigned to Company A, 13th Signal Service Battalion during World War II.  Therefore, there is no basis to correct his WD AGO Form 53-55 to show that he served with the 75th Infantry Division.

3.  Evidence of record shows that the applicant served as a teletype operator (237) during his service in the European-African-Middle Eastern Theater.  Therefore, he is not eligible for award of the Combat Infantryman Badge.

4.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the
record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

RVO____  DSJ_____  CJS_____  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999031998	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	200902	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19460723	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 615-365	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  1021		
2.  157		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.