RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:           21 September 2004
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2004100947


      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. James C. Hise                 |     |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, that his record be corrected to show
he entered the Army on 4 April 1944 vice 4 April 1945, as is currently
listed on his separation document (WD AGO Form 53-55) and to show all
awards and decorations to which he is entitled based on his Army service.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he enlisted on 4 April 1944 and
that he is entitled to the Purple Heart (PH), Philippine Liberation Medal
(PLM),
Korean Service Medal (KSM), and Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB).

3.  The applicant provides a support letter from a Member of Congress and a
third-party witness statement in support of his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
that occurred on 24 June 1953.  The application submitted in this case is
dated
24 October 2002 and was received on 24 November 2003.

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 primarily consisting of the
applicant’s separation documents, hospital admission records prepared by
the Office of The Surgeon General (OTSG) and a Final Payment Work Sheet (WD
Form 372 A).
4.  The applicant’s 1 January 1947 WD AGO Form 53-55 shows he was inducted
into the Army and entered active duty on 4 April 1945.  It further shows
that he was a member of the Transportation Corps and served in military
occupational specialty (MOS) 058 (Yardmaster).

5.  The applicant’s 1 January 1947 separation document also shows that he
served in the Pacific Theater of Operations from 8 November 1945 through
26 November 1946.  Item 32 (Battles and Campaigns) contains the entry
“None”, indicating no campaign participation and Item 33 (Decorations and
Citations) shows he earned the Army of Occupation Medal (Japan), World War
II Victory Medal and Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal during this period of
active duty service.  Item 34 (Wounds Received In Action) contains the
entry “None.”

6.  The WD AGO Form 53-55 finally shows the applicant was released from
active duty on 1 January 1947 after completing 1 year, 8 months and 29 days
of active military service.  The applicant authenticated this document with
his signature in Item 56 (Signature of Person Being Separated).

7.  A WD Form 372 A on file pertaining to the applicant confirms that he
received a final payment of $246.75 upon his separation on 1 January 1947.
There is no entry in the Combat Infantry Pay credit line contained in this
document.

8.  On 13 April 1949, the applicant reentered active duty in the Regular
Army and continuously served until being honorably discharged on 24 June
1953.  The separation document (DD Form 214) he was issued for this period
of service confirms he served in MOS 1783 (Transportation Equipment
Foreman).

9.  The applicant’s 24 June 1953 DD Form 214 further shows that he
completed 4 years, 2 months and 12 days of active duty service during the
period covered by the separation document, 1 year, 8 months and 29 days of
prior active duty service and a total of 5 years, 11 months, and 11 days of
active military service.

10.  Item 27 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and
Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the DD Form 214 shows he earned
the Army of Occupation Medal (Germany) during this period of active duty
service.  The applicant authenticated this document with his signature in
Item 48 (Signature of Person Being Separated).
11.  The applicant’s file includes two OTSG hospital admission records.
The first shows he was admitted to LaGarde General Hospital in Louisiana in
June 1945, for treatment of stomatitis (Inflammation of the oral mucosa,
due to local or systemic factors, which may involve the buccal and labial
mucosa, palate, tongue, floor of the mouth, and the gingivae).  The second
admission report shows he was admitted to a medical facility in Germany in
January 1951, for treatment of myositis (Inflammation of skeletal muscle).

12.  The applicant provides a third-party statement from a former member of
the United States Navy.  This individual states he served with the
applicant at Inchon, Korea from September 1945 through late 1946.  He
claims that during this period the United States forces deployed to Inchon
engaged in armed skirmishes with the Asians in the area.  He indicates most
of these actions took place around the Army railroad switching and
warehouse area.  He states that on 17 December 1945, one of these
skirmishes took place near the warehouse area.  He states that during this
incident, the applicant received wounds to his left arm and left leg while
repelling the attack while waiting for Army infantry units to arrive.

13.  During the review of this case, a member of the Board staff reviewed
the unit historical records that are maintained at the National Archives.
This search failed to reveal any evidence showing that the applicant was
ever wounded in action or that he was recommended for or awarded the PH.

14.  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 Force who, while
serving in any capacity with one of the Armed Services after 5 April 1917,
has been wounded or killed in action.  The regulation defines a wound as an
injury to any part of the body from an outside force or agent sustained
under conditions defined by this regulation.  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.

15.  Paragraph 5-8 of the awards regulation provides guidance on award of
the Korean Service Medal.  It states, in pertinent part, that it is
authorized for service within the territorial limits of Korea between 27
June 1950 and 27 July 1954.

16.  Paragraph 8-6 of the awards regulation contains the criteria for
awarding the CIB. It states, in pertinent part, that there are basically
three requirements for award of the CIB; the soldier must hold an infantry
MOS and be satisfactorily performing infantry duties; must be assigned to
an infantry unit of brigade or smaller size during such time as the unit is
engaged in active ground combat; and must actively participate in such
ground combat.

17.  War Department Circular 269-1943 established the CIB to recognize and
provide an incentive to infantrymen.  The CIB was awarded for exemplary
conduct in action against the enemy.  War Department Circular 186-1944
further provided that the CIB was to be awarded only to infantrymen serving
with infantry units of brigade, regimental or smaller size.  Additionally,
World War II holders of the CIB received a monthly pay supplement known as
combat infantry pay.   Thus, pay records are frequently the best available
source to verify entitlement to this award.

18.  Paragraph 9-15 of Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides guidance on the
PLM.  It states, in pertinent part, that it is authorized for qualifying
service in the Philippines between 17 October 1944 and 3 September 1945.
Qualifying criteria includes participation the initial landing operations
on Leyte or adjoining islands, participation in any engagement against the
enemy during the campaign on Leyte and adjoining islands, participation in
any engagement against the enemy on islands other than those included
above, or service in the Philippine Islands for not less than 30 days
during the period.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s claim that he entered active duty service in 1944 and
not 1945 was carefully considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence
to support this contention.  The available evidence includes a properly
constituted separation document that confirms the applicant was inducted
into the Army and entered active duty on 4 April 1945 and that he was
honorably separated on 1 January 1947.  A computation of the service dates
listed, 4 April 1945 through 1 January 1947, adds up to a total of 1 year,
8 months and 29 days of active military service, which is the period
documented on the separation document.  The applicant authenticated this
document with his signature, thereby verifying that the information it
contained, to include the date he entered active duty, was correct at the
time the document was prepared and issued.  Absent independent evidence
confirming an error in this active duty entry date, there is an
insufficient evidentiary basis to support this requested change.

2.  The applicant’s claim of entitlement to the PH and the third-party
statement he submitted were also 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.

3.  The available evidence includes the applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-55 that
contains the entry “None” in Item 34 (Wounds Received in Action) and OTSG
hospital admission records that show during his active service, the
applicant received treatment for only non-combat related illnesses.
Further, the historical records maintained at the National Archives fail to
show the applicant was wounded in action or awarded the PH.  Absent any
corroborating evidence of record, the information provided in the third-
party supporting statement does not satisfy the regulatory burden of proof
necessary to support award of the PH in this case.

4.  The applicant’s claim of entitlement to the CIB was also carefully
evaluated; however, by regulation, in order to support award of the CIB
there must be evidence the member performed infantry duties in a qualifying
infantry unit and was personally present with that qualifying unit while it
was engaged in combat action against enemy forces.  The available evidence
confirms the applicant served in non-infantry MOSs in non-infantry units
during both his periods of active duty service.  Thus, the regulatory
criteria necessary to support award of the CIB has not been satisfied in
this case.

5.  Finally, the applicant’s claim of entitlement to the PLM and KSM was
also considered.  However, the available evidence fails to show the
applicant served in the Philippines during the PLM qualifying period or
that he served in Korea during the qualifying period for the KSM.  As a
result, the regulatory criteria for either of these awards has not been
met.

6.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 24 June 1953.  Therefore, the time for
him to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on
23 June 1956.   However, he did not 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
timely file in this case.
BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

_JCH ___  _BJE ___  _PMS ___  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.

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.




            ____JAMES C. HISE _____
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2004100947                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2004/09/DD                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1953/06/24                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 615-360                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |ETS                                     |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.  awds |107.0000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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