MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

IN THE CASE OF:  

BOARD DATE:            10 February 2000
DOCKET NUMBER:    AR1999019872

	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.
	 		 	
	Ms. P. A. Castle		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Van B. Cunningham 		Chairperson	
	Mr. James P. Steuve		Member	
	Mr. Kenneth L. Wright		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 request to correct his records to reflect award of the Purple Heart.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that along with the series of documents he has submitted for reconsideration, his own sworn statement and the first submissions to the Board the award of the Purple Heart can be made. 

NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION:  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum of record (MOC) prepared to reflect the Board's original consideration of his case on 12 June 1996. (COPY ATTACHED).

The applicant submits his own sworn affidavit outlining the circumstances in which his battalion came under attack by German air fire when he was wounded in the leg during W.W.II.  He states he was driven to a battalion aid station where a surgeon removed a piece of shrapnel from his leg after which the surgeon pulled out a Purple Heart and put it on the table.  He told the surgeon he did not want it.  The applicant states that all of the officers previously agreed they would not accept an award of the Purple Heart unless the wound required evacuation.  The applicant submits the following to support his claim:

	a.  A sworn statement from an officer, who knew the applicant, knew of the pact that the officers had made, and knew that the applicant had been wounded.  The document is dated 10 August 1998.

b.  Statements from two doctors that attest to the fact he has a scar on his left leg that is very old.  These documents are dated October and August 1998.

c.  Evidence of attempts to contact former soldiers as witnesses:  an         8 July 1944 list of soldiers in the 211th Field Artillery Battalion shows each name coded as either deceased, address unknown or address known; a copy of an    e-mail asking a friend about locating two soldiers;  a copy of three pages from the internet with names of soldiers, their addresses and phone numbers; a sworn statement from an individual whose grandfather made a record of his combat in W.W.II and was the commanding officer of the 211th Field Artillery Battalion at one time; and copies of pages from the written history

Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that the Purple Heart is awarded for wounds sustained as a result of hostile action.  Substantiating evidence must be provided to verify that the wound was the result of hostile action, the wound must have required treatment by a medical officer, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.

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 does not meet the basic requirements for award of the Purple Heart.

2.  The statements of individuals are inadequate as the principle basis for an award of the Purple Heart because they do not fulfill the regulatory requirement that treatment by a medical officer be a matter of record.  However, they are normally accepted as a substitution of the combat or the enemy origin of a wound for which there is a record of treatment.

3.  Considering the entirety of the case, none of the statements submitted substantiate or are sworn statements by eyewitnesses to the account of the injury at that time.  Such statements, rendered over 25 years after the fact, not supported by any official documentation in official records are not as creditable.

4.  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.

5.  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:

________  __VBC__  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__KLW__  ________  ___JPS__  DENY APPLICATION

	Karl F. Schneider
			       Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999019872
AC96-06813 	
SUFFIX		
RECON	 	
DATE BOARDED	20000210	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	 	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	 	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107.0015	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.