ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 29 July 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20170003126 APPLICANT REQUESTS ON BEHALF OF THE FORMER SERVICE MEMBER (FSM): correction of the FSM’S DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) for the period ending 31 May 1970, to show he was authorized and awarded a second Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB.) APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * Partial Officer Qualification Record * DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award – Meritorious Achievement or Service), dated 21 July 1953 * General Orders Number 440, issued by Headquarters 45th Infantry Division, dated 27 July 1953 * Bureau of vital Statistics, Certificate of Death for the FSM, dated 20 March 1997 * A letter to the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) by the applicant, undated * A response letter issued by the HRC, Award and Decorations Branch to the applicant, dated 14 July 2014 * A response letter to HRC from the applicant, undated * A response letter from HRC to the applicant, dated 8 October 2014 * Birth Registration Card of the applicant * DD Form 214 * DD Forms 215, dated 26 June 2013 and 18 June 2014 FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, United States Code (USC), section 1552 (b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 2. The applicant'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 some his records were lost or destroyed in that fire. 3. The applicant states: a. He believes that his father, an FSM, met the requirements and is entitled to a second CIB. b. His father entered his second tour in Korea on 3 February 1953 as the Executive Officer. Shortly thereafter, he was the Company Commander of the 45th Replacement Company, 45th Infantry Division. c. After his mother’s passing, he received estate material which included his father’s DD Form 214 and his full military file. He and his father had many conversations about his battles, jobs, and awards. It was then, that the applicant realized that his father’s record needed some corrections. d. He started his correspondence with the National Records in St. Louis, MO., but was transferred to HRC for further help. After a few correspondence with different personnel, he received a letter of explanation from the HRC, Awards Branch Chief. The explanation was based on the fact that his father received a Bronze Star Medal (BSM) (First Oak Leaf Cluster) for the period 12 February 1953 to 27 July 1953, and the award recommendation form listed his father’s military occupational specialty (MOS) as Artillery. e. In his father’s case, his record of assignment sheet was incorrect and the BSM took precedence in deciding his MOS. The information that HRC sent is official; however, he believes that the information listed, including his father’s MOS was incorrect. f. He and his father had many conversations about Korea and how he was a young Infantry Commander during some pretty tough battles and his record of assignments in his personnel file clearly indicated that he was an Executive Officer and Company Commander in MOS 1542 [historical records shows the title of his MOS was Communications Chief during the Korean War era]. g. He also contacted the 45th Infantry Museum in Oklahoma City and spoke with the head historian who conducted some research and verified that his father was listed as the Company Commander of the Replacement Infantry Company. The historian explained that the Replacement Company was used to support the 45th Infantry Division and would be attached to different companies and batteries based on the needs of the division. This is why there may be some confusion in the thought that his father’s MOS was Artillery; however, his father did not officially take on the role as an Artillery Battery Commander, MOS 1174 [the FSM’s record shows he held this MOS while serving as a platoon leader in a field artillery batteries prior to and during the Korean War era] until 25 August 1953, when he was reassigned to the 145th Antiaircraft Artillery (AAA) Automatic Weapons (AW) Battalion. g. After speaking with the historian, he sent a request back to HRC further explaining the situation, in hopes that HRC would revisit his request for his father’s second CIB. However, he received a response from HRC that stated that they could not authorize the second CIB, and that the ABCMR would be the next governing body if he chose to appeal. h. Although his father was assigned to the 45th Replacement Company as a Company Infantry Commander and may have been used for Artillery at some point, he met the three requirements for the second CIB. 4. Item 18 (Record of Assignments) of the FSMs officer qualification record contains the following entries: * 12 February 1953 to 9 May 1953: MOS 1542 – Executive Officer – 45th Replacement Company, Far East Command (FECOM) * 10 May 1953 to 24 August 1953: MOS 1542 – Battery Commander – Battery D, 145th AAA AW Battalion, FECOM * 25 August 1953 to 1 March 1954: MOS 1174 – Battery Commander – Headquarters Battery, 26th AAA AW Battalion, FECOM 5. There is no evidence in the available record showing the FSM served in an infantry unit, in combat, during his service in Korea or that he was awarded a second CIB. 6. The FSM’s DD Form 214 shows he retired on 31 May 1970. 7. Pursuant to Army Regulation 600-70 (Personnel – Badges), in order to receive a CIB, a service member must meet three criteria: Be an infantry officer or enlisted man, or a warrant officer with an infantry MOS who, subsequent to 6 December 1941, has satisfactorily performed duty while assigned or attached as a member of an infantry unit of regimental or smaller size during any period such unit was engaged in active ground combat. Based on the FSM’s record, he does not appear to have met the criteria for award of a second CIB. 8. The applicant provides the following documents: a. A DA Form 638, shows the FSM’s service was Artillery and that he was assigned as the Company Executive Officer and Motor Officer from 12 February 1953 to 9 May 1953 and as the Company Commander from 10 May 1953 to 27 July 1953 (12 February 1953 – 27 July 1953). b. General Orders Number 440 shows the FSM was awarded the Bronze Star Medal (Oak Leaf Cluster) for the period 12 February 1953 to 27 July 1953. c. The FSM’s death certificate, dated 20 March 1997. d. A letter he sent to HRC on behalf of the FSM, requesting a second CIB and HRC’s response denying his request. HRC stated, "We were unable to verify [the FSM’s] entitlement to the CIB for his service in Korea. Although [the FSM] held the qualifying MOS, we note he was assigned to the 29th AAA AW Battalion, which does not meet the criteria of being an Infantry unit of brigade or smaller size. In this regard, he does not meet the criteria for this award." e. He submitted a rebuttal to HRC; however, HRC remained unable to verify the FSM’s entitlement for the second CIB based on his branch of service as Artillery. BOARD DISCUSSION: 1. The Board carefully considered the applicant’s request, supporting documents, evidence in the records and policy pertaining to award of the CIB. The Board considered the applicant’s statement, the FSM’s record of service to include service in Korea, the belief that records had been burned or destroyed in the fire at the National Records Center, the FSM’s available assignment history and duty specialty and the criteria for award of the CIB. The Board found insufficient evidence to support the award of a second CIB. Based on a preponderance of evidence, the Board determined that the absence of a second CIB in the FSM’s records was not in error or unjust. 2. After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found that relief was not warranted. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : 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. 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. ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE(S): Not applicable. REFERENCES: 1. Title 10, USC, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within three 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 three-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 2. Army Regulation 600-70, dated 24 September 1951, states for award of the CIB, the eligibility requirements are as follows: a. An individual must be an infantry officer or enlisted man, or a warrant officer with an infantry MOS who, subsequent to 6 December 1941, has satisfactorily performed duty while assigned or attached as a member of an infantry unit of regimental or smaller size during any period such unit was engaged in active ground combat. Awards may be made to assigned members of ranger infantry companies assigned or attached to tactical infantry organizations. Awards of this badge will not be made to general officer’s or to members of headquarters and headquarters companies of units larger in size than regiments. Battle participation credit alone is not sufficient; the unit must have been in active ground combat with the enemy during the period. b. Any officer whose basic branch is other than infantry who, under appropriate orders, has commanded an infantry unit of regimental or smaller size for at least 30 consecutive days is deemed to have been detailed in infantry and is eligible for the award of the CIB notwithstanding absence of written orders detailing him in the infantry, provided all other requirements for such award have been met. Orders directing the individual to assume command will be confirmed in writing at the earliest practicable date. c. One CIB is authorized to be awarded to each individual for each separate war, in which the requirements prescribed herein have been met . ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20170003126 6 1