PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           6 February 2003
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002074976

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.  

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Joseph A. Adriance		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson	
	Mr. James E. Anderholm		Member	
	Ms. Eloise C. Pendergast		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A -  Application for correction of military 
                             records
	Exhibit B -  Military Personnel Records (including
	                  advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests, in effect, that he be awarded the Purple Heart (PH) for being wounded in action during World War II.  

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that he served with the 760th Tank Battalion in Italy, and he was wounded in action in the January-February 1944 time frame.  In support of his application, he provides a third party witness statement from a former officer and commander of his World War II unit.  

4.  The applicant’s military records were 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 the applicant’s records were lost in that fire.  

5.  The available records do include the applicant’s separation document 
(WD AGO Form 53-55), which was issued to the applicant on the date of his separation.  This document verifies that he entered active duty on 8 March 1941, and that he continuously served on active duty until being honorably separated on 23 September 1945.

6.  The separation document also shows that he served in the European Theater of Operations (ETO), with the 760th Tank Battalion, from 25 January 1943 through 4 September 1945.  It also verifies that he participated in the following campaigns of World War II:  Naples-Foggia; Rome-Arno; Northern Apennines; and Po Valley.  The document further indicates that he earned the following awards during his tenure on active duty:  European-African-Middle Eastern Theater Campaign Medal with four bronze service stars and the Army Good Conduct Medal.  Item 34 (Wounds Received in Action) of the applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-55 contains the entry “None”, which indicates that he was not wounded or injured in action during his active duty tenure.

7.  The applicant provides a third party witness statement from a former officer and battalion commander of his World War II unit.  In this statement, this officer states that at the time the applicant was wounded he was in the same general area and he recalls the specific action.  He further indicates that the applicant was working on the exterior of his vehicle when an artillery shell exploded nearby, and the applicant received a number of shrapnel wounds to his arm and knee.  He also states that several members of the truck crew were wounded, and he provides names of two of the others wounded at the same time as the applicant, while participating in the same action.  

8.  In his witness statement, this former officer also attests to the fact that the applicant’s wounds were not serious enough for medical evacuation and confirms that the applicant was treated for his wounds at a forward aid station.  He states that at the time, every man was needed and only the most seriously wounded were evacuated for treatment.  This officer also indicates that X-Rays taken at a veteran’s medical center show that the applicant still retains shell fragments in his right hand, left arm, and both legs.  He concludes by stating that he regrets that there was an oversight on the part of the unit’s medical personnel in failing to forward the documentation necessary for the applicant to receive the PH at the time.  He concludes by indicating the applicant was an outstanding soldier and one that he has reason to remember well, and he now requests that the appropriate corrective action be taken. 

9.  In connection with the processing of this case, a member of the Board staff conducted a search of the historical records of the applicant’s unit that are maintained at the National Archives.  This produced no documentation showing that the applicant was awarded the PH.  However, a General Order (GO) Number 4, dated 1 June 1944, issued by Headquarters, 760th Tank Battalion, was found and it contained the name of one of the other soldiers referred to in the third party witness statement, who was wounded at the same time and in the same action as the applicant.  The GO reveals that this individual was wounded in action on 22 January 1944, in the vicinity of Mignano, Italy.  

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy and criteria concerning individual military awards.  Paragraph 2-8 contains the regulatory guidance pertaining to awarding the PH.  It states, in pertinent part, that the PH is awarded to any member of an Armed Forces who, while serving in any capacity with one of the Armed Services after 5 April 1917, has been wounded or killed as a result of hostile action by an enemy.  A wound is defined as an injury to any part of the body from an outside force or agent sustained as a result of enemy action.  In order to support awarding a member the PH, it is necessary to establish that the wound, for which the award is being made, required treatment by a medical officer.  This treatment must be supported by records of medical treatment for the wound or injury received in action, and must have been made a matter of official record.  

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Board notes the applicant’s claim of entitlement to the PH, and it finds this contention has merit.  By regulation, in order to support awarding the PH necessary to establish that a member was wounded or injured in action, the wound or injury required treatment, and this treatment was made a matter of official record.  

2.  Although the standard evidentiary records required for awarding the PH are not present in this case, the Board does find the information provided in the third party witness statement provided by the applicant is sufficiently credible to support his claim of entitlement to the PH, when coupled with information contained in the unit historical files maintained at the National Archives. 

3.  The witness statement provides specific facts and circumstances that included the name of another solider who had been wounded on the same date and in the same action as the applicant.  The unit historical files contained a copy of a GO that confirms this other soldier received a PH for the wound he received in this action.  Therefore, the Board finds the regulatory evidentiary standard has been sufficiently satisfied to warrant granting the requested relief. 

4.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by awarding the applicant the Purple Heart for wounds received on 
22 January 1944, in the vicinity of Mignano, Italy, while serving as a Technician Fifth Grade during World War II; and by providing him a corrected separation document that reflects this award.  

BOARD VOTE:  

__FNE__  __JEA  _  __ECP  __  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		_   _Fred N. Eichorn_  __
		      CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002074976	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2003/02/06	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1945/09/23	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 615-365	
DISCHARGE REASON	Demobilization	
BOARD DECISION	GRANT 	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  61	107.0015	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.