RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:           8 September 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040010989


      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. William D. Powers             |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. John T. Meixell               |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Larry J. Olson                |     |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 should have been awarded the PH
because he qualified for the PH under regulations governing the award.  He
claims his service medical record clearly shows he received a wound to his
face in the line of duty.  As a result, he is entitled to the PH.

3.  The applicant provides a self-authored statement, medical treatment
records and a first sergeant’s log in support of his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
that occurred on 25 October 1945.  The application submitted in this case
is dated
6 December 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 limitations 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 (NPRC) 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 that primarily consist of the
applicant’s separation document (WD AGO Form 53-55) and documents on file
in his NPRC file, which includes an Authorization for Issuance of Awards
(DA Form 1577).

4.  The applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-55 shows he was inducted into the Army
and entered active duty on 23 November 1943.  It also shows that he served
in the European Theater of Operations (ETO) from 10 May 1943 through
10 October 1945, and was credited with participating in the Central Europe,
Sicily, Naples-Foggia, Rome-Armo, Southern France and Rhineland campaigns.

5.  The applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-55 also shows he served in military
occupational specialty 078 (Electrician) and that he earned the European-
African-Middle Eastern (EAME) Campaign Medal with a bronze arrowhead and
Army Good Conduct Medal.  Item 34 (Wounds Received in Action) contains the
entry “None”, and the applicant authenticated the separation document with
his signature in Item 56 (Signature of Person Being Separated).

6.  A DA Form 1577, dated 17 July 2001, confirms the applicant was issued
the following earned awards:  AGCM, EAME Campaign Medal with 1 silver
service star, 1 bronze service star and a bronze arrowhead and World War II
Victory Medal.

7.  The applicant provides two medical treatment records indicating he was
treated for a laceration to his face that he received when he was struck by
a cable from a bridge on 29 May 1944.  Neither document indicates the cut
was received as a direct result of, or was caused by enemy action.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes the Army’s awards
policy.  Paragraph 2-8 contains guidance on awarding the PH.  It states, in
pertinent part, that each approved award of the PH must exhibit all of the
following factors: wound, injury or death must have been the result of
enemy or hostile act or international terrorist attack; the wound or injury
must have required treatment by medical officials; and the records of
medical treatment must have been made a matter of official Army records.

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 5-12 of the awards regulation contains guidance on award of
the European-African-Middle Eastern 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 ETO.  A
silver service star is used in lieu of 5 bronze service stars to denote
participation in five campaigns, and a bronze arrowhead is authorized to
denote participation in an assault landing.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s claim of entitlement to the PH and the supporting
documents he provided were carefully considered.  However, 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, that the wound required
medical treatment, and that the medical treatment was made a matter of
official record.

2.  It is clear that during his World War II service, the applicant
received and was treated for a laceration to his face that he received from
a bridge cable.  However, what is unclear is whether this wound was
received as a result of enemy action.  In spite of the medical treatment
records, the applicant’s
WD AGO Form 53-55 contains the entry “None” in Item 34, which indicates he
never sustained a wound/injury as a direct result of, or that was caused by
enemy action.  The applicant authenticated this separation document with
his signature, which in effect was his verification that the information it
contained, to include the Item 34 entry, was correct at the time the
document was prepared and issued.

3.  Further, the existence of the medical treatment records provided by the
applicant indicate his chain of command and responsible medical officials
were aware of his wound, and decided it did not qualify him for award of
the PH.  Thus, absent some corroborating evidence confirming his wound was
the direct result of, or caused by enemy action, or that he was recommended
for, or awarded the PH by proper authorities, the regulatory burden of
proof necessary to support award of the PH has not been satisfied in this
case.

4.  The evidence shows the applicant should have discovered the alleged
error or injustice related to award of the PH now under consideration on 25
October 1945.  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 evidence does confirm his World War II service and campaign
participation in the ETO entitles the applicant to the World War II Victory
Medal and to 1 silver service star, 1 bronze service star with his EAME
Campaign Medal.  The omission of these awards from his WD AGO Form 53-55 is
an administrative matter that does not require Board action to correct.
Thus, correction of his record 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

___WDP   ___JTM__  ___JLO _  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented does not demonstrate
the existence of a probable error or injustice related to award of the
Purple Heart.  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.

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 did determine that there were administrative errors in the
record of the individual that should be corrected.  Therefore, the Board
requests that the CMSD-St. Louis administratively correct the records of
the individual concerned to show that based on his World War II service and
campaign participation in the ETO, he is entitled to the World War II
Victory Medal and 1 silver service star and 1 bronze service star with his
European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal; and by providing him a
corrected separation document that includes these awards.




            ____William D. Powers____
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040010989                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005/09/08                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1945/10/25                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 615-365                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |Demobilization                          |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENYwithAdmin Note                      |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.  46   |107.0000                                |
|2.  61                  |107.0015                                |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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