PROCEEDINGS


         IN THE CASE OF:
        

         BOARD DATE: 21 May 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002066308


         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:

Ms. Jennifer L. Prater		Chairperson
Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		Member
Mr. Thomas Lanyi		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).

3. The applicant states, in effect, that he received a battle related injury when he was involved in an accident while driving a jeep during World War II. He claims that he was driving a jeep that was taking a Prisoner of War (POW) to Aken, Germany. The POW grabbed the wheel of the jeep and it went off the road, hit a land mine or some sort of explosive device that blew it up, and caused it to roll over several times. The POW was killed, and he was injured. In the applicant’s behalf, his niece provides a statement of support. She indicates that her uncle is asking that the records be corrected to show he was the driver of a jeep, and that his injury was combat related so that he may be awarded the PH. She comments that in 1945, during the Battle of the Bulge, cars were not available for joy riding around the base. Logic should support the fact that her uncle was in that jeep for a reason, and after 57 years not many people are left to tell their story. She also states that since the government records were destroyed through no fault of the applicant, he should be credited with knowing what actually took place, instead of relying on some reconstructed file. She concludes that, in her opinion, the benefit of the doubt should go to the veteran. Her uncle is not asking for money, only for recognition for what he so proudly did for his country. She requests that if anything can be done to help, in order for her uncle to receive this honor that would mean so very much to him and to the many people he has touched.

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 12 January 1943 and that he continuously served on active duty until being honorably separated on 19 November 1945.

6. The separation document also shows that he served in the European Theater of Operations (ETO), with the 289^th Infantry Regiment, from 3 November 1944 through 21 June 1945. It also verifies that he participated in the Ardennes, Rhineland, and Central Europe campaigns of World War II, and that he earned the following awards during his tenure on active duty: Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB); American Campaign Medal; European-African-Middle Eastern Theater Campaign Medal; Army Good Conduct Medal; and World War II Victory Medal.

7. 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. The applicant authenticated this document with his is signature in Item 56 (Signature of Person Being Separated), thereby verifying the information contained in it was correct at the time it was prepared.

8. Also on file is a report from the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), dated 4 January 2000. This document contains information from hospital admission cards created by the Office of the Surgeon General (OTSG) for the period 1942-1945. It indicates that the applicant was admitted to a military hospital and treated for a non-battle injury. The hospital admission report confirms that the applicant was treated for non-battle related injuries that he received while a passenger in an automobile involved in an accident. This record also verifies that the circumstances surrounding the injuries were all non-battle related. In addition, during the processing of this case, a member of the Board staff reviewed the unit records on file for the applicant’s unit at the NARA. This search confirmed his assignment to the 289^th Infantry Regiment, but failed to produce any evidence to show that he was wounded in action or entitled to the PH.

9. 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.

10. Paragraph 3-13 outlines the criteria for the award of the Bronze Star Medal (BSM). Paragraph 3-13d (2) states, in effect, that the BSM is authorized to members of the Armed Forces of the United States who, after 6 December 1941, were cited in orders or awarded a certificate for exemplary conduct in ground combat against an armed enemy between 7 December 1941 and 2 September 1945, inclusive, or whose meritorious achievement was otherwise confirmed by documents executed prior to 1 July 1947. This paragraph also stipulates that for this purpose, an award of the CIB is considered as a citation in orders.

---

11. Paragraph 5-12 contains guidance on the European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal, and it states, in pertinent part, that a bronze service star is authorized with this award for each campaign a member participated in while serving in the ETO.

CONCLUSIONS:

1. The Board notes the applicant’s contention that he is entitled to the PH for a combat related injury he received during a automobile accident during World
War II. However, it finds insufficient evidence to support this claim.

2. The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was hospitalized and treated for a non-battle related injury as a result of his involvement in an automobile accident. However, by regulation, in order to support an award of a PH there must be evidence confirming that the member was wounded or injured as a result of enemy action. The wound or injury must have been treated by military medical personnel, and this treatment must have been made a matter of official record. In this case, there are no medical or other official records to confirm that the applicant was ever wounded or injured in action or treated for a combat related wound or injury during his active duty tenure.

3. The Board wishes to advise the applicant that it does not question the veracity of his claim or that he was injured in an automobile accident while in the performance of his duty during World War II. Further, it wishes to congratulate him on his outstanding service to our country. However, based on the lack of supporting records and evidence to support his contention that the jeep accident he was involved in was combat related, it is regrettably compelled to deny his PH request. This action is taken in the interest of fairness and equity to all members who served during World War II and who face similar circumstances.

4. During the review of this case, the Board discovered that the applicant is entitled to awards that were not included in his separation document, and it determined it would be appropriate to add these awards to his record at this time.

5. By regulation, the BSM is authorized for members who, after 6 December 1941, were cited in orders or awarded a certificate for exemplary conduct in ground combat against an armed enemy during World War II; for this purpose, the CIB is considered as a citation in orders. Given the applicant was awarded the CIB, the Board concludes that it would be appropriate to award him the BSM based on this regulatory criteria and to add this award to his record at this time.

---

6. In addition, based on his campaign participation in the ETO during World War II, the applicant is entitled to three bronze service stars with his European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal, and the Board finds his records should be corrected to reflect this fact at this time.

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

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by awarding the individual concerned the Bronze Star Medal; showing that he is entitled to 3 bronze service stars with his European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal; and by providing him a corrected separation document that reflects these changes.

2. That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:

__JLP___ ___BJE__ __TL____ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION




                  Jennifer L. Prater___
                  CHAIRPERSON

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002066308
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED	2002/05/21
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1945/11/19
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 615-365
DISCHARGE REASON	Demobilization
BOARD DECISION	GRANT PARTIAL
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 61	107.0015
2. 46	107.0000
3.
4.
5.
6.