RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        21 February 2007
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060010872


      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. Marla J. N. Troup             |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. John G. Heck                  |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Donald L. Lewy                |     |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 originally declined the PH due
to the poor health of his mother.  He claims to have been afraid that news
of his being wounded in action might have been detrimental to his mother's
health and as a result he declined the award.

3.  The applicant provides a third-party statement from a family member and
an Office of The Surgeon General (OTSG) Hospital Admission Record for 1943
in support of his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
that occurred on 6 November 1945, the date of his separation.  The
application submitted in this case is dated 26 July 2006.

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 consist of the
applicant's separation document (WD AGO Form 53-55) and an OTSG Hospital
Admission Record for 1943.

4.  The applicant's WD AGO Form 53-55 shows he was inducted into the Army
and entered active duty on 2 February 1943.  He held and served in military
occupational specialty (MOS) 345 (Light Truck Driver), and he served in the
European Theater of Operations (ETO) from 25 June 1943 through 19 October
1945.
5.  The applicant's WD AGO Form 53-55 also shows that he participated in
the Napples-Foggia, North Appennines, Rome-Arno and Po Valley campaigns.
Item 33 (Decorations and Citations) shows that during his active duty
tenure, he earned the Army Good Conduct Medal and European-African-Middle
Eastern Campaign Medal with 4 bronze service stars.  The PH is not included
in the list of awards contained in Item 33, and Item 34 (Wounds Received in
Action) contains the entry "None."  The applicant authenticated the WD AGO
Form 53-55 with his signature in Item 56 (Signature of Member Being
Separated) on the date of his separation.

6.  The applicant's National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) file contains
an OTSG Hospital Admission Record for 1943.  It shows that the applicant
was admitted to a military medical treatment facility in Italy in December
1943, and was treated for a fracture to his middle finger.  This report
indicates the causative agent for the injury was crushing between two
objects.  It also listed the circumstances as non-battle related, and
indicated the injury occurred while the applicant was handling firearms,
ammunition, etc, on post or in camp.

7.  On 6 November 1945, the applicant was honorably separated, in the rank
of corporal, after completing a total of 2 years, 9 months, and 5 days of
active military service.

8.  A family member of the applicant provides a third-party statement that
indicates that fragments from enemy aircraft fire shattered the applicant's
finger while he was on a convoy somewhere in Germany.  He also states the
only reason the applicant did not receive the PH was because his mother was
in poor health and he was afraid that news of him being wounded in action,
it could push her over the line, and she would pass away before he could
return home.

9.  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, that the wound required
treatment by military medical personnel, and a record of this treatment
must have been made a matter of official record.

10.  Paragraph 5-11 of the awards regulation provides guidance on the World
War II Victory Medal.  It states, in pertinent part, that it was authorized
for members who served on active duty between 7 December 1941 and
31 December 1946, both dates inclusive.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's claim of entitlement to the PH was carefully
considered.  However, in order to support award of the PH, there must be
evidence confirming the member was wounded in action, that the wound for
which the award is being made required treatment by military medical
personnel, and a record of this medical treatment must have been made a
matter of official record.

2.  The applicant's file includes an OTSG Hospital Admission Record for
1943, which confirms he was treated for a fracture to his finger.  This
document confirms his injury was non-battle related.  There is no
information or documentation on file that indicates the applicant was ever
wounded as a result of enemy action, or that he was ever treated for a
battle related wound or injury while serving on active duty.  The record is
also void of any orders, or other documents, that indicate he was ever
recommended for, or awarded the PH by proper authority.

3.  Further, the PH is not included in the list of awards contained in Item
33 of the applicant's separation document, and Item 34 contains the entry
"None", which indicates he was never wounded in action.  The applicant
authenticated the
WD AGO Form 53-55 with his signature in Item 56 on the date of his
separation from active duty.  In effect, his signature was his verification
that the information contained on the separation document, to include the
Item 33 and Item 34 entries, was correct at the time the document was
prepared and issued.

4.  The veracity of the applicant's claim that he injured his finger while
serving during World War II and of the information contained in the third-
party statement is not in question.  However, absent any evidence of record
corroborating that the applicant was wounded in action, or treated for a
combat related wound or injury while serving on active duty, the regulatory
burden of proof necessary to support award of the PH has not been satisfied
in this case.

5.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration related to award of the PH on 6 November
1945, the date of his separation from active duty.  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.
 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 timely file in this case.

6.  The evidence of record does show that based on his World War II
service, the applicant is entitled to the World War II Victory Medal.  The
omission of this award from his separation document is an administrative
matter that does not require Board action.  Therefore, the Case Management
Support Division (CMSD), St. Louis, Missouri, will administratively correct
his record as outlined in paragraph 3 of the BOARD
DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION section below.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___MJNT   __JGH __  __DLL __  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 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 to show his entitlement to the World War II Victory Medal.




                                  _____Marla J. N. Troup____
                                            CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060010872                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2007/02/21                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1945/11/06                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 615-365                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |Demobilization                          |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY with Note                          |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Schwartz                            |
|ISSUES         1.  46   |107.0000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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