RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:           1 December 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050007307


      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. John T. Meixell               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Maribeth Love                 |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Richard G. Sayre              |     |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, it was unjust for him not to receive
the PH.

3.  The applicant provides the following documents in support of his
application:  Self-Authored Statement; American Legion Service Officer
Letter, dated 1 March 1985; and two Third-Party Letters of Support, dated
10 March 1985 and
11 August 1989.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
that occurred on 12 January 1946, the date of his separation from active
duty.  The application submitted in this case was received on 17 June 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 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 consists of the
applicant’s separation document (WD AGO Form 53-55.

4.  The applicant’s separation document shows that he was inducted into the
Army of the United States on 5 November 1942, entered active duty on
19 November 1942, and continuously served on active duty until being
honorably separated on 12 January 1946.  It also shows that he served in
the Pacific Theater of Operations (PTO) from 4 July 1944 through 12
December 1945, and that he participated in the New Guinea, Northern
Solomons, and Luzon campaigns.
5.  Item 33 (Decorations and Citations) of the applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-
55 shows that during his active duty tenure, he earned the following
awards:  Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM); Philippine Liberation Medal with 1
bronze service star; American Campaign Medal; Asiatic-Pacific Campaign
Medal with 3 bronze service stars and a bronze arrowhead; and World War II
Victory Medal.  The PH is not included in this list of authorized awards.
Item 34 (Wounds Received In Action) contains the entry “None”.  The
applicant authenticated this separation document with his signature in Item
56 (Signature of Person Being Separated).

6.  There are no medical treatment records on file that show the applicant
was ever treated for a combat related wound or injury.

7.  The applicant provides a third-party letter from his commanding officer
during World War II.  This individual certifies that the applicant was a
member of his company when it landed on Morath Island in September 1944.
He further states that during a nightly bombing raid, the applicant
received an injury to his left ear as a result of a severe concussion that
resulted in his complete loss of hearing.

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 applicant’s separation document contains the entry “None” in Item
34, and he authenticated this document with his signature.  In effect, this
was his verification that the information the document contained, to
include the list of awards, was correct at the time.  The veracity of his
claim of entitlement to the PH and the information contained in the third-
party statement is not in question.  However, absent any evidence
corroborating that he was wounded in action, or ever treated for a combat
related wound or injury, the regulatory burden of proof necessary to
support award of the PH has not been satisfied in this case.
3.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice related to award of the PH now under consideration on 12 January
1946, the date of his separation.  Thus, 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

___JTM__  ___ML__  __RGS __  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.




            ____John T. Meixell_____
                    CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050007307                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005/12/01                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1946/01/12                              |
|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]