PROCEEDINGS


         IN THE CASE OF:
        

         BOARD DATE: 8 May 2003
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2003084177


         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. Samuel A. Crumpler		Chairperson
Mr. Mark D. Manning		Member
Mr. Robert L. Duecaster		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 his was wounded in action when he received an injury to his right hand while under a Japanese artillery attack. He claims that he was treated at a field hospital and was offered the PH, however, he refused it at the time. In support of his application, he provides a Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) disability rating decision letter, dated 10 July 2002.

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. However, there were sufficient documents remaining in a reconstructed record for the Board to conduct a fair and impartial review of this case.

5. The separation document (WD AGO Form 53-55) issued to the applicant on the date of his discharge shows that he was inducted into the Army of the United States and entered active duty on 3 February 1943. He continuously served on active duty until being honorably separated on 26 December 1945.

6. The applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-55 also shows that he served in the Pacific Theater of Operations (PTO) from 19 July 1943 through 26 November 1945, and that the highest rank he attained was private first class, which is the grade he held on the date of his separation. This document also shows that he served in military occupational specialty 607 (Mortar Crewman) and he served in the
82^nd Chemical Mortar Battalion. It also confirms that he participated in the Luzon, Northern Solomons, and Bismarck Archipelago campaigns of World War II, and that during his active duty tenure he earned the following awards: Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal with 3 bronze service stars; Philippine Liberation Ribbon;
Good Conduct Medal; and World War II Victory Medal.

7. Item 34 (Wounds Received in Action) of the applicant’s separation document contains the entry “None”, which indicates that he was not wounded or injured in action during his tenure on active duty. Also on file is a military record finding report from the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), dated
4 February 2003. 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 in March 1944, the applicant was treated at an aid station in the Central, South Pacific, for an injury to his hand. The report specifies that the injury was non-battle related.

---

8. The DVA letter provided by the applicant confirms that a scar to his right middle finger was determined to be service connected. However, it does not render a judgment or contain information in regard to whether the injury was combat related or incurred as a result of enemy action.

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 in order to award a PH there must be evidence that a member was wounded or injured as a result of enemy action. The wound or injury for which the PH is being awarded must have required treatment by a medical officer, this treatment must be supported by medical treatment records that were made a matter of official record.

10. Paragraph 5-10 of the awards regulation provides guidance on awarding the Army of Occupation Medal. It states, in pertinent part, that this award was authorized for those units serving in Japan between 3 September 1945 and
27 April 1952. Paragraph 5-13 of the regulation contains guidance on the Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal. It states, in pertinent part, that a bronze arrowhead is authorized with this award to denote participation in a combat parachute jump, helicopter assault landing, combat glider landing, or amphibious assault landing, while assigned or attached as a member of an organized force carrying out an assigned tactical mission.

11. Paragraph 9-24 of the awards regulation contains guidance on the Philippine Republic Presidential Unit Citation. It states that it was awarded to certain units of the Armed Forces of the United States in recognition of participation in the war against the Japanese Empire during the periods 7 December 1941 and 10 May 1942, inclusive, and 17 October 1944 to 4 July 1945, inclusive.

12. Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-1 (Unit Campaign Participation Credit Register-World War II) establishes the eligibility of individual members for campaign participation credit, assault landing credit, and unit citation badges awarded during World War II. It confirms that during his tenure of assignment with the unit, the 82^nd Chemical Mortar Battalion participated in the three campaigns listed that are listed in his separation document, it received assault landing credit for the Liagayan Gulf on 9 January 1945, it was awarded the Philippine Republic Presidential Unit Citation, and it participated in the Army of Occupation of Japan.

---

CONCLUSIONS:

1. The Board notes the applicant’s contention that the PH should be added to his record based on his being wounded in action during World War II. However, it finds insufficient evidence to support this claim. By regulation, in order to support awarding a member the PH, it is necessary to establish that a member was wounded or injured in action.

2. Although the available evidence confirms he incurred an injury to his hand while serving in the PTO, there is no indication that this injury was combat related or the result of enemy action. The OTSG treatment record contained in the NARA report on file indicates that it was a non-battle related injury, and his WD AGO 53-55 contains an entry that indicates he was not wounded or injured in action during his tenure on active duty.

3. Lacking independent evidence verifying his entitlement to the PH, the Board is compelled to deny the applicant’s PH request. This action is taken based on the lack of sufficient evidence to satisfy the regulatory burden of proof required to award the PH, and in the interest of all those who served during World War II who faced similar circumstances.

4. During its review of this case, the Board did find that the applicant is entitled to awards that were not included in his record or separation document. The evidence shows that during his tenure of assignment with the 82^nd Chemical Mortar Battalion in the PTO, the unit received assault landing credit on 9 January 1945, which entitles him to a bronze arrowhead with his Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal. It also received occupation of Japan credit for the period 5 November through 5 December 1945, which entitles him to the Army of Occupation Medal with Japan Clasp. Finally, the unit was awarded the Philippine Republic Presidential Unit Citation for the period 17 October 1944 through 4 July 1945, which he is entitled to based on his tenure of assignment in the unit. As a result, the Board concludes that it would be appropriate to add these awards to his record at this time.

5. 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 showing that in addition to those awards already listed in his separation document, the individual concerned is entitled to the Army of Occupation Medal-Japan, the Philippine Republic Presidential Unit Citation, and to a bronze arrowhead with his Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Ribbon; and by providing him a corrected separation document that includes these awards.

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

BOARD VOTE:

_MDM___ __SAC__ _RLD___ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION




                  Samuel A. Crumpler
                  CHAIRPERSON

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002084177
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED	2003/05/08
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1945/12/26
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 615-365
DISCHARGE REASON	Demobilization
BOARD DECISION	GRANT PARTIAL
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 46	107.0000
2. 61	107.0015
3.
4.
5.
6.