RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:         9 March 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050014269


      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. Richard T. Dunbar             |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Jeanette B. McPherson         |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. David W. Tucker               |     |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, that the records of her deceased
husband, a former service member (FSM), be corrected to include the Purple
Heart, and all other awards to which he is entitled.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that the FSM is entitled to the PH.

3.  The applicant provides the following documents in support of the
application:  Death Certificate; Check & Note; Separation Document (WD AGO
Form 53-55); Honorable Discharge Certificate; and Third-Party Statements.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
that  occurred on 21 June 1946.  The application submitted in this case is
dated
1 August 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 FSM'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 his 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 FSM's WD AGO Form 53-
55, a Prisoner of War (POW) Medal Work Sheet, an Authorization for Issuance
of Awards (DA Form 1577), and the other documents submitted with the
application.

4.  The FSM's separation document shows he was inducted into the Army and
entered active duty on 25 March 1941.  He held the rank of corporal (CPL)
on the date of his separation, 21 June 1946.  He served in the Pacific
Theater of Operations from 26 September 1941 through 26 September 1945, and
participated in the Philippine Island Defense and Anti-Submarine campaigns.

5.  Item 33 (Decorations and Citations) of the FSM's WD AGO Form 53-55
shows he earned the following awards during his active duty tenure:
American Defense Service Ribbon with 1 bronze service star; Asiatic-Pacific
Campaign Medal with
2 bronze service stars; Philippine Defense Ribbon with 1 bronze service
star; Army Good Conduct Medal; Distinguished Unit Badge 2nd Oak Leaf
Cluster; World War II Victory Medal; American Theater Ribbon; and World War
II Victory Medal.

6.   Item 34 (Wounds Received in Action) of the FSM's separation document
contains the entry "None", and the FSM authenticated this document with his
signature in Item 56 (Signature of Person Being Separated) on the date of
his separation, 21 June 1946.

7.  On 28 July 1988, the FSM's application for the POW Medal was approved,
and he was issued the POW Medal on 2 August 1988.

8.  The applicant provides three third-party statements from Soldiers who
were in a Japanese prison camp with the FSM.  Two of the individuals, who
indicate they are friends, state the applicant was beaten while he was a
POW, and that he has suffered from back problems ever since.  The third
statement is from an individual who was also in the same POW camp as the
FSM.  This individual states that he is aware that the FSM suffered from
malnutrition, dengue fever, scurvy and chronic diarrhea during the time
they were POWs.  He also states that he is aware that for the past several
years, it was difficult for the FSM to perform manual labor due to chronic
back pain.  This third individual does not comment on the FSM being beaten
while a POW.

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.  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.

10.  Paragraph 2-9 of the awards regulation contains guidance on the POW
Medal.  It states that it was approved on 8 November 1985, and is
authorized for any person who, while serving in any capacity with the U.S.
Armed Forces, was taken prisoner and held captive after 5 April 1917.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's claim that the FSM is entitled to the PH, and the
supporting statements provided were carefully considered.  However, by
regulation, in order to support award of the PH, there must be evidence
that confirms the member received the wound for which the award is being
made as a result of enemy action, that he/she was treated for the wound 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 the FSM is entitled to the
PH, and of the information contained in the third-party statements provided
is not in question.  However, the FSM's separation document contains the
entry “None” in the wounds received in action block and the PH is not
included in the list of earned awards.  The FSM authenticated his WD AGO
Form 53-55 on the date of his separation, 21 June 1946.  In effect, his
signature was his verification that the information contained 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 any evidence of record or medical treatment records to
corroborate the information contained in the supporting third-party
statements, or that confirm the FSM was treated for a combat related wound
by military medical personnel, the regulatory burden of proof necessary to
support award of the PH has not been satisfied in this case.  As a result,
it would not be in the best interest of all those who served during World
War II and who faced similar circumstances to award the FSM the PH at this
late date.

4.  Records show that the alleged error or injustice related to award of
the PH now under consideration should have been discovered on 21 June 1946,
the date of the FSM's separation.  Therefore, based on the date the Board
was established, 2 January 1947, the time to file a request for correction
of any error or injustice expired on 1 January 1950.  Neither the FSM nor
the applicant filed within the 3-year statute of limitations and 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 has not been
provided.

5.  The evidence confirms the FSM was awarded the POW Medal in 1988.  As
a result, it would be appropriate to add this award to his separation
document
at this time.  The omission of this award is an administrative matter that
does
not require Board action.  Therefore, this administrative correction will
be accomplished by the Case Management Support Division (CMSD),
St. Louis, Missouri, as outlined by the Board in paragraph 3 of the
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION section below.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___RTD _  __JBM __  __DWT__  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 Prisoner of War Medal; and by
providing a correction to the  separation document that includes this
change.




                                  _____Richard T. Dunbar ____
                                            CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050014269                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |2006/03/09                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD,                                     |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1946/06/21                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 615-365                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |Demobilization                          |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY with Note                          |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.  61   |107.0015                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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