BOARD DATE: 5 December 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160005363 BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____x____ _____x___ ____x____ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration BOARD DATE: 5 December 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160005363 BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20140018090, dated 23 June 2015. _______________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. BOARD DATE: 5 December 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160005363 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, the son of a deceased former service member (FSM), requests reconsideration of the previous Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) decision as promulgated in Docket Number AR20140018090 on 23 June 2015. In effect, he requests correction of his father's WD AGO Form 53-55 (Enlisted Record and Report of Separation – Honorable Discharge) to show he was awarded the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with four component bars (Rifle, Small Bore Rifle, Machine Gun, and Submachine Gun). 2. The applicant states, in effect: a. The Board erred in judgement by stating he didn't have additional evidence that supported an award of the Sharpshooter Badge with four component bars. (1) The standard used by the Board suggests he was trying to establish that the Marksmanship Badge should have been awarded, similar to the other medals the Board awarded. Rather, the standard used should have been merely to show an award was already made and his father's record simply needed to be corrected. (2) The original Request was not to "award" the Sharpshooter Badge, but merely to show the Board that his father had previously been awarded the badge and his record needed correction. A "correction" of a military record shouldn't require the original standards as if one was originally trying to get the award. Therefore, a photograph showing the Soldier wearing the badge and published in public newspaper is proof that the Soldier was indeed awarded a Sharpshooters Badge. (3) To find otherwise, the Board would have to find that the original photo, which was published, was either a fake or that the Soldier was wearing an award he wasn't entitled too. Again, this wasn't to establish that an award needed to be made but rather to show an award was previously made at the appropriate time and in accordance with the appropriate rules but the Soldier's record did not reflect that. b. The Board erred and gave contradictory findings based on the evidence. The Board, as outlined, found that there was no "additional" evidence to corroborate the awarding of this badge. However, the Board then went on to further describe that the FSM's own record showed no evidence of misconduct and therefore, the Board felt the awarding of the Army Good Conduct Medal was appropriate. (1) He would like to point out that it is against Article 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) to wear unauthorized badges, decorations, medals, devices and lapel buttons; the maximum penalty includes a dishonorable discharge. (2) The governing awards regulation at the time clearly states the wearing of any decoration, service medal, badge, service ribbon, lapel button, or insignia authorized by the Department of the Army, by any person not properly authorized to wear such device or the use of any decoration, service medal, badge, service ribbon, lapel button, or insignia to misrepresent the identification or status of the person by whom such is worn, is prohibited. He finds this contradictory to the Board's conclusion that the FSM was entitled to a Good Conduct Medal. Not weighing heavenly the undisputed fact that he is seen in uniform at the time, wearing what the Board would then have to characterize and conclude was an unauthorized badge. Clearly, the fact the FSM was photographed in uniform at the time wearing the qualification badge would have been enough for court-martial proceedings, of which the Board acknowledged there were none. As quoted, there is no evidence in the FSM's records of disciplinary actions or a commander's disqualification for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal. c. He is submitting no less than five photographs of his father taken at different times and locations, in which he is wearing the same qualification badge with 4 components bars. d. The purpose of the original application was not to find or discern entitlement to any award but to inform the Board that the FSM had been previously awarded the Sharpshooter Qualification Badge with the 4 component bars (Rifle, Small Bore, Machine Gun, and Submachine Gun). The FSM's record needs to be properly corrected to reflect that fact. The Board took it upon itself to determine what "other awards" the FSM may be entitled too but in doing so, placed a higher standard of burden on the original request. What more proof does one need to show the Board that an award was previously made than to show a photo of the FSM wearing the award and then a photo of the actual badge itself? Along with an affidavit swearing that this was the actual badge given. e. He appreciates the Board's time and efforts in reevaluating his request. He wishes the Board would keep in mind that he wasn't asking to see if his father qualified; rather, he was trying to inform the Board that his father did qualify for the award and simply needed his permanent record to be corrected. Somehow, that information didn't make it through. 3. The applicant provides a self-authored statement and: * six photos of the FSM in uniform * a newspaper article of the FSM with an accompanying photograph * the FSM's WD AGO Form 53-55, for the period ending 11 September 1945 * a copy of a Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, County of York affidavit, dated 13 October 2014 * the Record of Proceedings (ROP) for ABCMR Docket Number AR20140018090, dated 23 June 2015 * the FSM's Army Good Conduct Medal orders, dated 30 June 2015 * the FSM's DD Form 215 (Correction of DD Form 214 Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), dated 8 July 2015 CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Incorporated herein by reference are military records and evidence that were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the ABCMR in Docket Number AR20140018090 on 23 June 2015. 2. The applicant presents several photos and a new argument that were not previously considered by the Board. These photos constitute new evidence that warrants reconsideration at this time. 3. The FSM's military records are 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 his records were lost or destroyed in that fire. 4. The FSM was inducted into the Army of the United States on 24 July 1943. 5. The FSM was honorably discharged on 11 September 1945. His WD AGO Form 53-55 does not show he was awarded a Marksmanship Qualification Badge. The FSM signed the form. 6. The FSM's record was posthumously updated on 8 July 2015 to show he was awarded or authorized additional awards and decorations. However, the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge was not added to his record. 7. The applicant provides: a. Photographs of the FSM in his military uniform wearing the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle, Machinegun, Submachinegun, and Small Bore Rifle Bars. The provided photographs appear to show the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge or First Class Gunner Badge on the FSM's uniform; however the component bars are not visible. b. A newspaper article that has a photograph of the FSM wearing a badge the applicant contends is the subject badge. The newspaper article describes events that led to the FSM being awarded the Purple Heart. In addition, it states he participated in the invasion on D-Day. The photograph with the newspaper article is a smaller rendition of the blown-up photograph mentioned above. c. A 13 October 2014 affidavit that shows the applicant swore under oath that the photograph shown on the affidavit is a true photo of the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge that his father kept in a cedar chest along with his other ribbons and bars. He now holds the cedar chest in his possession. His father claimed he earned the badge during basic training during World War II. The photo represents the same badge that he is shown wearing in a photo in a newspaper article from September 1944, announcing his being wounded in action and clearly identifies him. The applicant also stated the photo in the article is a photograph of his father. He finally stated the component bars are the Rifle, Small Bore Rifle, Machinegun, and Submachine Gun bars. REFERENCES: Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning individual and unit military awards. The Marksmanship Qualification Badge is awarded to indicate the degree in which an individual, military, or civilian has qualified in a prescribed record course and an appropriate bar is furnished to denote each weapon with which he or she qualified. Each bar will be attached to the basic badge that indicates the qualification last attained with the respective weapon. Basic qualification badges are of three classes: Expert, Sharpshooter, and Marksman. However, award of marksmanship badges is not permanent. An award for previous marksmanship weapons qualification is revoked automatically whenever an individual, upon completion of firing a record course for which the previous award was made, has not attained the same qualification. DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant contends his father, the FSM, was at one time authorized to wear the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with 4 component bars. He is not asking for his father to be awarded the badge, since the badge was already awarded and his father subsequently wore the badge on his uniform. He is asking that his father's record reflect his authorization to the badge with component bars. 2. The FSM's complete official military personnel file is not available for review. 3. The ABCMR operates pursuant to law and begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity. The presumption of administrative regularity has been applied to this case in that the items recorded on the FSM's discharge document are correct as listed. The ABCMR will decide cases on the evidence of record. 4. The FSM signed his separation document when he was discharged from the Army. His WD AGO Form 53-55 does not show he was awarded a Marksmanship Qualification Badge. 5. Soldiers who served during the FSM's period of service, who trained for the rigors of WWII and D-Day, often qualified with more than one weapons system. However, the FSM's record provides no evidence of his qualification with any weapons systems, undoubtedly due to the incomplete nature of his records. 6. In order to grant relief, the Board would have to conclude that a preponderance of the evidence shows the FSM qualified as a Sharpshooter with each of the weapons systems the applicant has identified. 7. The applicant provides photographs that show his father wearing what appears to be, the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with four component bars, albeit unknown or unverified component bars. In addition, he provides an affidavit attesting to the decoration as being in his care, along with his father's other awards and decorations. He contends this is sufficient evidence to show the degree in which his father qualified, in order to properly list the badge and any corresponding component bars on his father's WD AGO Form 53-55. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160014599 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160005363 6 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2