RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:  


	BOARD DATE:	  04 April 2008
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070017339 


	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.



Director



Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:



Chairperson



Member


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 award of the Purple Heart.
 
2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was injured on 2 November 1942 (sic) in the line of duty.  The applicant also states that while serving on a combat mission as a navigator on a B-17, the aircraft was hit by flak and he was wounded on the left ankle.  The applicant further states that upon arrival back at the airfield, the post doctor cleaned the wound, treated and dressed it, and he was told to take it easy for a couple of days.  The applicant concludes by stating that he was so happy to be alive he never followed-up on the award.

3.  The applicant provides copies of a War Department (WD), Adjutant General Office (AGO) Form Number 53-98 (Military Record and Report of Separation Certificate of Service), with an effective date of 13 June 1945; a 201 Document (Operational Missions) pertaining to the applicant; and a personal letter from the applicant, dated 2 November 1942 (sic).

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  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 also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant's military service 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.

3.  The applicant's records contain a WD AGO Form 53-98 (Military Record and Report of Separation Certificate of Service).  This document shows, in pertinent part, that the applicant entered active duty on 23 October 1943 and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 1034 (Navigator).  Item 32 (Service Outside Continental U.S. [United States] and Return) shows he departed the U.S. for the European Theater of Operations (ETO) on 15 June 1944, arrived in the ETO on 29 June 1944, departed the ETO on 6 January 1945, and returned to the U.S. on 9 January 1945.  Item 6 (Organization) shows he was assigned to the 326th Bomb Squadron, 92nd Bomb Group (H), England.  Item 26 (Battles and Campaigns) shows he participated in the Normandy, Northern France, and Rhineland campaigns.  Item 29 (Decorations and Citations) shows he was awarded the Air Medal with 5 oak leaf clusters and European-African-Middle Easter Campaign Medal with 3 bronze service stars.  Item 30 (Wounds Received In Action) contains the entry “None.”  This document also shows that the applicant was honorably discharged on 13 June 1945 and credited with completing 6 months and 24 days foreign service, and 1 year, 0 months, and
26 days continental service.

4.  The applicant's military service records contain a copy of a National Personnel Records Center (NPRC), Military Personnel Records, St. Louis, Missouri, letter, dated 12 November 2003.  This document shows in response to Representative Henry A. W_____’s inquiry on behalf of the applicant’s request for award of the Purple Heart, the Director, NPRC, informed Congressman W_____ that the NPRC was unable to verify his entitlement to award of the Purple Heart.  

5.  The applicant's military service records contain a copy of an NPRC, Military Personnel Records, St. Louis, Missouri, letter, dated 23 February 2004.  This document shows in response to Representative Henry A. W_____’s inquiry on behalf of the applicant’s request for award of the Purple Heart, the Director, NPRC, informed Congressman W_____ that the NPRC conducted a search of the morning reports and sick reports of 326th Bomb Squadron from 21 October 1944 to 27 November 1944, but no entries were found that pertained to the applicant’s request that would verify his entitlement to award of the Purple Heart. 

6.  In support of his application the applicant provides the following documents:

     a.  WD AGO Form Number 53-98 (Military Record and Report of Separation Certificate of Service), with an effective date of 13 June 1945, which was introduced and previously considered in this Record of Proceedings.

     b.  A 201 Document (Operational Missions) that shows the applicant participated in 35 missions from 25 July 1944 through 24 December 1944 and identifies various targets.  This document also shows, in pertinent part, that on
2 November 1944 the applicant participated in an operational mission and the target was Merseburg, Germany.
     c.  A personal letter from the applicant, dated 2 November 1942 (sic), in which he describes a mission he was on that day during which the aircraft took heavy flak and he and others were hit in their ankles.  The letter also contains, in pertinent part, the statement, “[t]he flak tore the boot right off my foot but didn’t do any damage other than bruise the leg.”

7.  A review of the applicant's military service records reveals that he may be entitled to additional awards.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy and criteria concerning individual military awards.  This Army regulation provides, in pertinent part, that the Good Conduct Medal is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency, and fidelity during a qualifying period of active duty enlisted service.  The regulation states that, after 27 August 1940, three years of qualifying service was required for award of the Good Conduct Medal, but during the World War II era, the first award could be made based on 1 year of qualifying service provided that service occurred between
7 December 1941 to 2 March 1946.

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, for award of the World War II Victory Medal.  It is awarded for service between 7 December 1941 and 31 December 1946, both dates inclusive.

10.  Army Regulation 670-1 ((Wear and Appearance of Army Uniforms and Insignia), in effect at the time, governs the requirements for the Overseas Service Bar.  In pertinent part, it provides that a bar is authorized for wear for each period of active Federal service as a member of the U.S. Army outside of the continental limits of the United States (CONUS) for the specific time frames and areas of operation cited in Army Regulation 670-1, or the appropriate Department of the Army message.  For World War II service, 1 Overseas Service Bar is authorized for each period of 6 months active Federal service as a member of a U.S. Service outside CONUS from 7 December 1941 to 2 September 1946.  For credit toward the Overseas Service Bar, service is computed between dates of departure from, and arrival at, a port in the United States or the boundary of CONUS.

11.  Army Regulation 600-45 (Decorations), which governed the award of Army decorations until 23 August 1951, stated that for the purpose of considering an award of the Purple Heart, a “wound” is defined as an injury to any part of the body from an outside force, element, or agent sustained while in action in the face of the armed enemy or as a result of a hostile act of such enemy.

12.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 prescribes Army policy and criteria concerning individual military awards.  Paragraph 2-8 contains the regulatory guidance pertaining to awarding the Purple Heart.  It states, in pertinent part, that the Purple Heart is awarded to any member who has been wounded or killed in action.  A wound is 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 Purple Heart, 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.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends, in effect, that he is entitled to award of the Purple Heart because he was injured by flak on the left ankle on 2 November 1944 (vice 2 November 1942) while serving on a combat mission as a navigator on a B-17.

2.  The sincerity and authenticity of the applicant’s comments in his writings are not in question.  However, the documentary evidence he provides is insufficient evidence upon which to base award of the Purple Heart.  

3.  The Army regulatory guidance governing the criteria for award of the Purple Heart is clear in that the wound for which the award is made must have required treatment by a medical officer and record of the medical treatment for the wound or injury received in action must have been made a matter of official record.

4.  There is no evidence the applicant was awarded the Purple Heart.  There is no official documentary evidence in the applicant's military service records that supports his contention that he sustained a wound as a result of hostile action or was treated for a wound by a medical officer.  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence upon which to base award of the Purple Heart in this case.

5.  The evidence of record shows that the applicant served honorably in the Army of the United States, from 23 October 1943 through 13 June 1945, and was credited with completing 1 year, 7 months, and 20 days active service.  In view of this period of honorable active duty service, the applicant is entitled to award of the Good Conduct Medal based on completion of a period of qualifying service ending with the termination of a period of Federal military service.  Therefore, the applicant is entitled to correction of his records to show this award.

6.  The evidence of record shows that the applicant qualified for award of the World War II Victory Medal.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his records to show this service medal.

7.  Records show the applicant served 6 months and 24 days in the European Theater of Operations during World War II.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his records to show award of 1 Overseas Service Bar.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

__PBF __  __ENA__  __JCR___   GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by:

     a.  awarding the applicant the Good Conduct Medal for exemplary conduct, efficiency, and fidelity for the period 23 October 1943 to 13 June 1945; and

     b.  adding to Item 29 of his WD AGO Form 53-98 the Good Conduct Medal, World War II Victory Medal, and 1 Overseas Service Bar.	    

2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to the Purple Heart.




___    Eric N. Andersen___
          CHAIRPERSON