IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 9 August 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110002085 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 award of the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB). 2. He states the decision to deny him the CIB in July 1946 was based on his military occupational specialty (MOS) of 137 (Projectionist, Motion Picture). He offers that his application for the CIB is based on service rendered in October to November 1943 while performing duties in MOS 604 (Light Machine Gunner). 3. He provides the following: * WD AGO Form 53-55 (Enlisted Record and Report of Separation – Honorable Discharge) * letter from the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) * Congressional correspondence * excerpts from Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) * self-authored statement 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 complete military records are not available to the ABCMR 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 or destroyed in that fire. However, there were sufficient documents remaining for the ABCMR to conduct a fair and impartial review of this case. 3. Records available to the Board show the applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States on 24 February 1943 and entered active duty on 3 March 1943. He served in the European-African-Middle Eastern theater from 6 October 1943 to 1 June 1944 and was honorably discharged on 11 March 1946. 4. His WD AGO Form 53-55 lists his organization as Company L, 179th Infantry Regiment, 45th Infantry Division. His MOS is listed as "137 Projectionist Motion Picture." 5. Item 33 (Decorations and Citations) of his WD AGO Form 53-55 does not show award of the CIB. There is no evidence or any orders awarding him the CIB. 6. He provides correspondence exchanged between himself, members of Congress, and NPRC which shows he was denied award of the CIB. 7. War Department Circular 269-1943 established the CIB 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 CIB was awarded for exemplary conduct in action against the enemy. War Department Circular 186-1944 further provided that the CIB was to be awarded only to infantrymen serving with infantry units of brigade, regimental, or smaller size. Additionally, World War II holders of the CIB 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 Military Awards Branch of the U.S. Army Human Resources Command has advised in similar cases that during World War II the CIB was normally awarded only to enlisted individuals who served in the following positions: light machine gunner (604), heavy machine gunner (605), platoon sergeant (651), squad leader (653), rifleman (745), automatic rifleman (746), heavy weapons noncommissioned officer (812), and gun crewman (864). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. There is no evidence in the available records and the applicant has not provided any evidence to show he should be awarded the CIB. Although he was assigned to an infantry unit, there is no evidence to show he held an infantry MOS and physically participated in combat while the unit was actively engaged with enemy. 2. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting his request. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____X____ ____X___ ____X____ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. _____________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) AR20110002085 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110002085 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1