MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            14 July 1999                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999025718

	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. Kenneth Aucock		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler		Chairperson	
	Mr. Ernest M. Willcher		Member	
	Mr. John Saputo		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:  That he be awarded the Purple Heart.  

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was exposed to gas on Biak in New Guinea, and although the doctor [who treated him] had no information that the Japanese had used gas, the Japanese had admitted doing so.  His medical history showed that he had asthma as a child, and the conclusion [reached by the doctor] was that asthma caused his breathing problems.

The applicant states that he was the only cryptographer on duty at the time [of the gas attack] when he started choking and found it difficult to breath.  He was taken to a hospital, and examined by a doctor the next morning.  He was eventually evacuated to the United States.  He was discharged with a 30 percent disability.  

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records may have been lost or destroyed in the National Personnel Records Center fire of 1973.  Information herein was obtained from alternate sources.

An undated message, which the applicant submits with his request, from the Army News Service quotes an American general officer, the chemical warfare officer on General MacArthur’s staff,  who had stated that the Japanese had used poison gas against American troops in a few isolated instances, notably New Guinea, and that the most recent incident was on 5 March 1945 when a Japanese patrol set off vomiting gas candles in the signal corps area at Biak.  Japanese officials denied knowledge of the use of gas, but conceded that they were unable to say whether field commanders had used it.  That general also stated that the Japanese had also tossed gas grenades at American concentrations at Biak.

A newspaper clipping, dated 10 December (year unknown), which the applicant submits with his request, quotes this same American General officer providing similar information as indicated in the aforementioned message.

In a 19 February 1997 letter to the applicant, a former comrade describes a war time incident on Biak, in which he stated that a Japanese plane bombed Biak one night, implying that it was a gas attack, and that someone in Manila, who knew that he was in the gas attack, gave him the aforementioned message. 

On 14 May 1997 the National Archives at College Park notified the applicant that there was no record of any use of gas by the Japanese on Biak.  It was possible that the aforementioned radio message was in their records; however, with several hundred thousand pages of radio messages, that agency could not search all of them for him.  In response to his question, he was informed that it was possible that the record he was seeking could be missing.  Of all the records created by the Federal government, only about 2 percent are maintained permanently.  That agency again informed him on 21 August 1998 that it could not locate any documentation concerning the alleged use of gas on Biak.

On 9 October 1998 a member of this agency informed the applicant that this Board could not make a decision on his application because of insufficient information and therefore, his application was returned without action.  In his     24 October 1998 reply, he stated that he was enclosing his entire file which supported his request, proving unquestionably his right to the Purple Heart.  Especially, in view of the fact that 98 percent of all files and documentation have been destroyed; therefore, it was incumbent upon this Board to accept the evidence that he was furnishing. 

Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides that the Purple Heart is awarded for a wound sustained as a result of hostile action.  A physical lesion is not required; however, substantiating evidence must be provided to verify that the wound was the result of hostile action, the wound must have required treatment, 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, and advisory opinion(s), it is concluded:

1.  Notwithstanding the information provided by the applicant, he has not provided evidence that he was wounded by a gas attack on Biak in New Guinea during World War II.  There is no evidence of a wound, or that he was treated for injuries as a result of an enemy released chemical attack.  The applicant is therefore not entitled to award of the Purple Heart.

2.  The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of his request.   

3.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

4.  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

__sac___  ___emw__  ___js___  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999025718	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	19990714	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1. 107.00		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.