MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            29 March 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999028013

	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. Wanda L. Waller		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Robert G. Hinkle		Chairperson	
	Mr. Mark D. Manning		Member	
	Mr. James P. Steuve 		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:  Correction of his military records to show the Purple Heart (First Oak Leaf Cluster).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was awarded the Purple Heart for wounds received in action in January 1945 in the European Theater of Operations.  He contends that he also sustained a cold weather injury (trench foot, bilateral) on 8 February 1945 in Luxembourg and believes this injury warrants an award of the Purple Heart too.  In support of his application, he submits medical documentation, a copy of his WD AGO Form 53-55 (Enlisted Record and Report of Separation), orders for the Purple Heart dated 18 January 1945 and a VA Rating Sheet dated 18 June 1946. 

COUNSEL CONTENDS:  The American Legion, as counsel for the applicant, supports the applicant’s contention and notes that he submitted service medical records showing treatment for trench foot and a VA Rating determination indicating that he was granted service connection for trench foot, bilateral.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

The applicant’s military records were destroyed or lost during the National Personnel Records Center fire of 1973.  Records available to the Board were obtained from alternate sources and show that the applicant enlisted on 14 June 1943.  He served as an administrative noncommissioned officer in the European Theater of Operations from 24 October 1944 through 26 March 1946 and was honorably discharged on 8 April 1946.

The applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-55, which was authenticated in his own hand, shows one award of the Purple Heart for wounds received on 10 January 1945 in the European Theater of Operations.   

There is no evidence in the available records that shows the applicant was injured or wounded a second time as a result of hostile action.  

The applicant provided medical documentation which shows he was hospitalized on 9 February 1945 and diagnosed with trench foot, bilateral, mild.  He also provided a VA Rating Sheet, dated 18 June 1946, which indicates he was granted service connection for trench foot, bilateral, at the 10 percent rate.

Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part, that the Purple Heart is awarded for a wound 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, and the medical 

treatment must have been made a matter of official record.  The regulation also states that frostbite and trench foot injuries are examples of injuries or wounds which clearly do not qualify for award of the Purple Heart.  The bronze oak leaf cluster is awarded to denote the second and succeeding awards of certain decorations, among which is the Purple Heart.

While award of the Purple Heart for frostbite injuries is currently prohibited, such injuries were previously a basis for the award.  Until 1951 Army Regulation 
600-45, which governed the award of Army decorations, 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.  An “element” pertains to weather and the award of this decoration to personnel who were severely frostbitten while actually engaged in combat is authorized.  The regulation also specifically states that trench foot will not be considered as meriting award of the Purple Heart. 

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.  Evidence of record shows the applicant was awarded the Purple Heart for wounds sustained on 10 January 1945 in the European Theater of Operations during World War II.

2.  The Board noted the applicant’s contention that he should be awarded an additional award of the Purple Heart for his cold weather injury (trench foot, bilateral) in February 1945.  However, the current governing regulation and the regulation in effect at the time, specifically state that trench foot injuries do not qualify for award of the Purple Heart.  Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to an additional award of the Purple Heart or correction of his military records to show the Purple Heart (First Oak Leaf Cluster).

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

RGH____  MDM____  JPS ____  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999028013	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000329	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19460408	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 615-365  	
DISCHARGE REASON	Convenience of the Government	
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107.0015	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.