MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:	 

	BOARD DATE:            16 June 1999                 
	DOCKET NUMBER:	AC91-07705B
		AR1999015087

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mr. Gerald E. Vandenberg		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. James M. Alward		Chairperson	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		Member	
	Mr. Allen L. Raub		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                       records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  Reconsideration of his previous application to correct his records by awarding him the Purple Heart.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, regulations have changed and he believes that these changes should be applied to his case.

NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION:  The applicant’s case is reopened in accordance with the Army Board for Correction of Military Records Reconsideration Project (ABCMR-RP) criteria.  The applicant’s previous request was administratively closed.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum prepared to reflect the Board's original consideration of his case on 3 June 1992 (COPY ATTACHED). 

The applicant submits copies of the 1985 revision to the criteria for the Purple Heart and a copy of a newspaper article which reports the award of the Purple Heart to service members who were on helicopters that were hit by friendly fire during Desert Storm.

Army Regulation 600-8-22, provides, in pertinent part, that the Purple Heart is awarded for a wound sustained while in action against the enemy or as a result of hostile action.  AR 672-5-1, paragraph 2-15.1, provides, in pertinent part, that the wound must have required treatment by a medical officer, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record. 

Included as part of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act for fiscal year 1994 was an amendment to the rules governing award of the Purple Heart.  While the original rules established that the Purple Heart would be awarded to individual's killed or wounded as a result of hostile action the amendment enabled the Secretaries of each department to award the Purple Heart to members of the armed forces who were killed or wounded in action by weapon fire, while directly engaged in armed conflict, other than as the result of an act of an enemy of the United States.  This ruling, in effect, granted the service Secretaries the authority to award the Purple Heart to individuals directly engaged in armed conflict who were killed or wounded as a result of "friendly fire."

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  The applicant’s request for the Purple Heart is not in the same category as the victims of the helicopter personnel.  He is not claiming a friendly fire incident which is why the helicopter personnel received their award. 
2.  The overall merits of the case, including the latest submissions and arguments are insufficient as a basis for the Board to reverse its previous decision.

3..  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__JMA_ _  ___MHM_  ___ALR_   DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AC91-07705B
AR1999015087	
SUFFIX		
RECON	 	
DATE BOARDED	19990616 	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	 	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	 	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	   . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION		
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES        1.		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.