RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        17 May 2007
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060016379


      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. Gerard W. Schwartz            |     |Acting Director      |
|     |Mr. Joseph A. Adriance            |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Eric N. Andersen              |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr, Antonio Uribe                 |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Rodney E. Barber              |     |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 received a head injury due to a
direct hit.

3.  The applicant provides no additional documentary evidence in support of
his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
that occurred on 17 February 1946, the date of his separation.  The
application submitted in this case was received 27 November 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 (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, which primarily consist of
the applicant's separation document (WD AGO Form 53-55), Office of The
Surgeon General (OTSG) Hospital Admission Records for 1944 and 1945, and
other medical treatment records remaining in the applicant's NPRC file.

4.  The applicant's WD AGO Form 53-55 shows he was inducted into the Army
and entered active duty on 18 June 1943.  It also shows he served in the
European Theater of Operations (ETO) from 4 April 1944 through 2 February
1946, and that he was assigned to Battery A, 567th Antiaircraft Artillery
Automatic Weapons Battalion.

5.  Item 32 (Battles and Campaigns) of the applicant's WD AGO Form 53-55
shows he participated in the Normandy and Northern France campaigns, and
Item 33 (Decorations and Citations) shows that during his active duty
tenure, he earned the following awards:  Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM),;
European-African-Middle Eastern (EAME) Campaign Medal with bronze
arrowhead; and World War II Victory Medal.  The PH is not included in the
list of awards contained in Item 33.  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), on the date of his separation.

6.  The applicant's separation document also confirms he was honorably
separated on 17 February 1946, in the rank of technician five (TEC-5),
after completing a total of 2 years, 8 months and 7 days of active military
service.

7.  The applicant's NPRC file contains several medical treatment records
that show the applicant was treated for various illnesses in 1944 and 1945;
however, none of these documents show any of his illnesses or injuries were
combat related.  The applicant's file is void of any indication that he was
ever wounded in action, or that he was ever treated for a combat related
wound or injury.  Further, his file contains no orders or other documents
that indicate he was ever recommended for or awarded the PH by proper
authority while serving on active duty.

8.  The applicant's NPRC file contains an OTSG Hospital Admission Record
for 1944 that shows he was admitted to medical treatment facility in the
ETO in May 1944, and was treated for Nasipharyngitis (Upper Respiratory
Infection), a
non-battle related illness.  The report contains an entry indicating that
the applicant had no history of prior disease, injury, or battle casualty.
A second OTSG Hospital Admission Record on file shows the applicant was
admitted to a military medical treatment facility in the ETO in June 1944,
and was treated for ligament strain in the Lumbosacral region, a non-battle
related injury.  A third OTSG admission record shows he was admitted to a
military medical treatment facility in the ETO in October 1944, and was
treated for Psychoneurosis, anxiety, a non-battle related illness.

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides the Army's awards
policy.  Paragraph 2-8 contains guidance pertaining to awarding the PH.  It
states, in pertinent part, that in order to support award of the PH, there
must be evidence that the wound for which the award is being made was
received as a result of enemy action, that the wound was treated by
military medical personnel, and a record of this medical treatment must
have been made a matter of official record.

10.  Paragraph 5-10 of the awards regulation contains guidance on the Army
Occupation Medal.  It states, in pertinent part, that it is authorized for
Germany during the period 9 May 1945 through 5 May 1955.  It is only
authorized for service between 9 May and 8 November 1945 if the EAME
Campaign Medal was authorized before 9 May 1945.

11.  Paragraph 5-12 contains guidance on the EAME Campaign Medal.  It
states, in pertinent part, that a bronze service star is authorized for
wear on this medal for each campaign a member is credited with
participating in while serving in the ETO.

12.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-1 (Unit Campaign Participation
Credit Register-World War II) establishes the eligibility of individual
members for campaign participation credit, assault landing credit, and unit
citation badges awarded during World War II.  This source confirms that
during his tenure of assignment, the applicant’s unit (Battery A, 567th
Antiaircraft Artillery Automatic Weapons Battalion) was awarded occupation
credit for Germany for the period
20 May through 31 October 1945.  It also shows that in addition to the
campaigns listed on the applicant's separation document, campaign credit
was also granted for the Ardennes-Alsace and Central Europe campaigns.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s claim of entitlement to the PH was fully 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 received a head injury
while serving in the ETO during World War II is not in question.  However,
his separation document does not include the PH in the list of awards
contained in Item 33.  Item 34 contains the entry “None”, which indicates
he was never wounded as a result enemy action, and the applicant
authenticated the separation document with his signature in Item 56 on the
date of his separation. 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 WD AGO Form 53-55 was
prepared and issued.

3.  Absent any evidence confirming that he was wounded as a result of enemy
action, that he was ever treated for a combat related wound or injury by
military medical personnel, or that he was ever recommended for or awarded
the PH by proper authority while serving on active duty, the regulatory
burden of proof necessary to support award of the PH has not been satisfied
in this case.  As a result, in the interest of all those who served during
World War II and who faced similar circumstances, it would not be
appropriate to grant the requested relief in this case.

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration related to award of the PH on 17 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.  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.

5.  The evidence does show that based service and campaign participation in
the ETO, he is entitled to the Army Occupation Medal with Germany Clasp and

4 bronze service stars and bronze arrowhead with his EAME Campaign Medal.
Further, the Ardennes-Alsace and Central Europe campaigns should be added
to those campaigns already listed in Item 32 of his WD AGO Form 53-55.
These matters are administrative in nature and do not require Board action.
 Therefore, the Case Management Case Management Support Division (CMSD),
St. Louis, Missouri, will correct the applicant's record and separation
document as outlined in paragraph 3 of the BOARD
DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION section below.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___ENA _  __AU ___  ___REB _  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 concerned 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 Army of Occupation
Medal with Germany Clasp and
4 bronze service stars and bronze arrowhead with his European-African-
Middle Eastern Campaign Medal; and by adding the Ardennes-Alsace and
Central Europe campaigns to Item 32 of his WD AGO Form 53-55.




                                  _____Eric N. Andersen ____
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060016379                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2007/05/17                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1946/02/17                              |
|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]