RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:            8 March 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040002153


      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. Mark D. Manning               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Barbara J. Ellis              |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Paul M. Smith                 |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, award of the Purple Heart (PH).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he feels he should have been awarded
the PH. He claims that while attacking a ridge, he was under some trees and
he received an airburst from artillery shells.  He states that he was
medically evacuated to Guam, where he was treated and then returned to his
unit.

3.  The applicant provides a self-authored statement and a copy of his
separation document (WD AGO Form 53-55) in support of his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
that occurred on 24 July 1946.  The application submitted in this case is
dated 20 May 2004.

2.  Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for
correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery
of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law allows the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file
within the 3-year statute of limitation if the ABCMR determines that it
would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will
conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in
the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  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 the
applicant’s records were lost or destroyed 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.  This case is being
considered using reconstructed records, which primarily consist of the
applicant’s separation document (WD AGO Form 53-55).

4.  The applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-55 shows he was inducted into the Army
and entered active duty on 12 July 1944.  He continuously served until
being honorably separated on 24 July 1946, by reason of Demobilization.  It
also shows he served in Pacific Theater of Operations from 28 January 1945
through 1 July 1946.  It further shows that during his tenure on active
duty, he earned the Combat Infantryman Badge, Asiatic-Pacific Campaign
Medal, Good Conduct Medal and Army of Occupation Medal with Japan Clasp.
5.  Item 34 (Wounds Received in Action) of the applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-
55 contains the entry “None” and the PH is not included in the list of
awards included in the separation document.  The applicant authenticated
his separation document with his signature in Item 56 (Signature of Person
Being Separated).

6.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part,
that the Purple Heart (PH) is awarded for a wound sustained as a result of
hostile action. Substantiating evidence must be provided to verify that the
wound was the result of hostile action; the wound required medical
treatment; and the medical treatment was made a matter of official record.


7.  Paragraph 3-13 of the awards regulation outlines the criteria for award
of the BSM.  It states, in pertinent part, that it is awarded to any person
who, while serving in any capacity in or with the Army of the United States
after 6 December 1941, distinguished himself by heroic or meritorious
achievement or service, not involving participation in aerial flight, in
connection with military operations against an armed enemy; or while
engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing armed
force in which the United States is not a belligerent party.  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.  This
paragraph also stipulates that for this purpose, an award of the CIB is
considered as a citation in orders.

8.  Paragraph 3-13 of the awards regulation outlines the criteria for award
of the BSM.  It states, in pertinent part, 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.  This paragraph also stipulates that for this purpose, an
award of the CIB is considered as a citation in orders.

9.  Paragraph 5-11 of the awards regulation contains guidance on the World
War II Victory Medal.  It states, in pertinent part, that it was awarded
for service between 7 December 1941 and 31 December 1946, both dates
inclusive.

10.  Paragraph 5-13 contains guidance on award of the Asiatic-Pacific
Campaign Medal.  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 PTO.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s claim of entitlement to the PH and the supporting
statement he provided were carefully considered.  However, by regulation,
in order to support award of the PH there must be evidence that the wound
or injury on which the award is based was received as enemy action, that
the wound required medical treatment, and that the medical treatment was
made a matter of official record.

2.  The evidence includes a WD AGO Form 53-55 that contains an entry in
Item 34 that indicates the applicant was never wounded/injured as a result
of combat action.  The applicant authenticated this document with his
signature.  His signature confirms he verified that the information
contained on the separation document, to include list of awards and the
Item 34 entry, was correct at the time the document was prepared and
issued.

3.  The veracity of the applicant’s claim of entitlement to the PH is not
in question.  However, absent any evidence to corroborate that he sustained
and/or was treated for a combat related wound/injury, the regulatory burden
of proof necessary to support award of the PH has not been satisfied in
this case.

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 24 July 1946.  Therefore, based on the
date the Board was established, 2 January 1947, the time for him to file a
request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 1 January 1950.
 However, he failed to file within the 3-year statute of limitations and
has not provided a compelling explanation or evidence to show that it would
be in the interest of justice to excuse failure to file.

5.  The record does show that based on his having earned the CIB, the
applicant is entitled to the BSM, for his exemplary conduct in ground
combat against an armed enemy while serving in the PTO between 28 January
and 2 September 1945.  It further shows that based on his World War II
service and campaign participation in the PTO, he is entitled to the World
War II Victory Medal and
1 bronze service star with is Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal.  The omission
of these awards from his record and separation document is an
administrative matter that does not require Board action to correct.
Therefore, administrative correction of his records will be accomplished by
the Case Management Support Division (CMSD), St. Louis, Missouri, as
outlined by the Board in paragraph 3 of the BOARD
DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION section below.
BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___MDM_  ___PMS   ___BJE__  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that 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
for correction of the records of the individual concerned by awarding the
Purple Heart.

2.  As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence
provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year
statute of limitations prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient
basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for
correction of the records of the individual concerned.

3.  The Board determined that administrative error in the records of the
individual should be corrected.  Therefore, the Board requests that the
CMSD-St. Louis administratively correct the records of the individual
concerned by awarding him the Bronze Star Medal; by showing he is entitled
to the World War II Victory Medal and 1 bronze service star with his
Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal; and by providing him a corrected separation
document that includes these awards.




            ____Mark D. Manning__________________
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040002153                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005/03/08                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1946/07/24                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 615-365                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |Demobilization                          |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.  61   |107.0015                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]