MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

IN THE CASE OF:       

BOARD DATE:           27 June 2000 
DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000036029

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Ms. P. A. Castle		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Mark D. Manning		Chairperson	
	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Member	
	Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		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 the Board in its original memorandum of consideration did not indicate whether they had considered the eyewitness statement he submitted.

NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION:  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum of consideration (MOC) prepared to reflect the Board's original consideration of his case on         1 December 1999.  (COPY ATTACHED)

The applicant submits a 15 February 1998 statement signed by the unit radio operator.  This is new evidence that requires Board consideration.

The radio operator writes that while under attack, in May 1967, his radio battery went dead.  He called for another battery and the applicant brought it to him.  As the applicant was leaving the foxhole, he got hit in the left leg with a piece of shrapnel.

Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that the Purple Heart is awarded for a wound sustained while in action against any enemy or 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 or 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 statements of individuals are inadequate as the sole basis for an award of the Purple Heart because they do not fulfill the regulatory requirement that there be a record of medical treatment.
 
2.  There is no available medical record to show that the applicant was treated for a wound sustained while in action against the enemy or as the result of enemy action.

3.  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. 

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

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___MDM_  ___WTM_  __CLG__  DENY APPLICATION

	Carl W. S. Chun
                                                  Director, Army Board for Correction
                                                                of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000036029	
SUFFIX		
RECON	 	
DATE BOARDED	20000629 	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION		
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES        1.  	107.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.