RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:           10 November 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050004070


      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. Margaret K. Patterson         |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Linda D. Simmons              |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Michael J. Flynn              |     |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, that he is a wounded World War II Army
veteran who is entitled to the PH.  He claims he did not know he was
wounded until 37 years later, when he found out while undergoing a bladder
operation.  He states that his doctor said his bladder diverticulum had
grown to the size of a grapefruit and that he could tell he fell a great
distance when he was a young man.  He then realized that on D-Day minus
one, a Kamikazi plane crashed into the ship he was on and blew it up.  He
also states that he is also entitled to a PH for a nose wound he received.
He states he thought the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) would take
care of the PHs, but that has not happened.  He concludes by stating he has
had three operations on his bladder and two on his nose.

3.  In support of his request, the applicant provides the 21 documents
identified in the list of attachments included with his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
that occurred on 4 January 1946.  The application submitted in this case is
dated
12 March 2005.

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.

4.  This case is being considered using reconstructed records that
primarily consist of the applicant’s separation document (WD AGO Form 53-
55) and the documents submitted by the applicant.

5.  The applicant’s separation document shows he was inducted into the Army
and entered active duty on 29 January 1943.  He served in military
occupational specialty 931 (Truck Driver), and he held the rank of private
first class (PFC) on the date of his separation, 26 February 1946.  It also
shows he served in the Pacific Theater of Operations (PTO) from late
October 1943 through 4 December 1945, and that he participated in the New
Guinea and Southern Philippines campaigns.

6.  Item 34 (Wounds Received In Action) of the applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-
55 contains the entry “None”.  Item 33 (Decorations and Citations) shows
that during his active duty tenure, he earned the following awards:
Asiatic-Pacific Campaign Medal; Philippine Liberation Medal with 2 bronze
service stars; and World War II Victory Medal.  The applicant authenticated
this document with his signature in Item 56 (Signature of Person Being
Separated).

7.  Included in the documents provided by the applicant is a self-authored
statement, dated 10 June 1983.  In this statement, the applicant admits
that he was injured when he jumped off the ship that had returned him to
the United States in San Francisco.  He confirms that when he jumped, he
broke his left arm and ruptured his bladder.  He states that he went to the
emergency room at home the next day, and was instructed to go to an Army
hospital, where he received treatment for his injuries. He also provides a
VA rating decisions and treatment records that confirm he has received
service connection for bladder diverticulum.

8.  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.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s claim of entitlement to the PH and the supporting
evidence he provided were carefully considered.  However, by regulation, in
order to support award of the PH, there must be evidence a member was
wounded/injured in action, was treated for the wound/injury by military
medical personnel and a record of this medical treatment must have been
made a matter of official record.

2.  The veracity of the applicant’s claim that he was injured while serving
during World War II is not in question.  However, his separation document
contains the entry “None” in the wounds received in action block, the PH is
not included in the list of earned awards, and the applicant authenticated
this document with his signature on the date of his separation.  In effect,
this was his verification that the information on the separation document,
to include the Items 33 and 34 entries, was correct at the time the WD AGO
Form 53-55 was prepared and issued.

3.  Absent evidence to corroborate that he received the bladder and nose
injuries in question as a direct result of, or that that they were caused
by enemy action, or that he was treated for a combat related wound/injury
by military medical personnel, the regulatory burden of proof necessary to
support award of the PH has not been satisfied in this case.

4.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must
show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily
appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to
submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement

5.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice related to award of the PH now under consideration on 26 February
1946, the date of his separation.  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.
BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___MKP_  __LDS __  __MJF __  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.




            ____Margaret K. Patterson___
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050004070                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005/11/10                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1946/02/26                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 615-365                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |Demobilization                          |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.  61   |107.0015                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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