PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:  6 February 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2000043923

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

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Ms. Joyce A. Wright		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. Thomas Lanyi		Member	
	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

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

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests that he be awarded the Purple Heart and that his undesirable discharge be upgraded. 

3.  The applicant states that item 29 (Wounds Received as a Result of Action with Enemy Forces) of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States) shows that he received a shrapnel wound to his left arm on 29 May 1951.  He also states that the date of injury is “29 May 1952” instead of “29 May 1951” and that his discharge should be upgraded.  In support of his application he submits a copy of his WD AGO Form 53 (Enlisted Record and Report of Separation), a copy of his DD Form 214, a character reference, and three certificates showing that he met the criteria as an alcohol counselor.

4.  The American Legion, as counsel for the applicant, contends that the applicant makes reference to the issue of entitlement to the Purple Heart and his shrapnel wound in item 29 of his DD Form 214.  Counsel also makes reference to the issue of entitlement to an upgrade in the character of the applicant’s service, and that the bases for his discharge includes two short periods of AWOL and two incidents involving his use of alcohol.  Counsel further states that in requesting an upgrade, the applicant has submitted documentation indicating that he did receive treatment for alcoholism following his discharge from the service and that he eventually became an alcohol counselor.  Counsel goes on to state that the applicant’s over-all service appears to be more deserving of an honorable type discharge and that under current standards the applicant would receive treatment for his alcohol abuse, with an opportunity to return to duty.
Counsel requested that the Boards’ final decision reflect sound equitable principles consist in law, regulation, policy, and discretion. 

5.  The applicant’s military records were lost or destroyed in the National Personnel Records Center fire of 1973.  Records available to the Board were obtained from alternate sources and show he entered active duty on 30 June 1947 as an automotive mechanic (014).  He continued to serve until he was honorably discharged on 17 December 1948. 

6.  After a break in service, he reenlisted on 8 August 1950 as a cannoneer.

7.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 does not show the Purple Heart as an authorized award.

8.  Item 29 of the applicant’s DD Form 214, which was authenticated in his own hand, shows the entry “SHRAPNEL WOUND LEFT ARM 29 May 51”.  There is no record that the applicant was awarded the Purple Heart.

9.  The applicant’s records contain a WD AGO Form 267 (Record of Previous Convictions), which shows that he was convicted by three summary and one special court-martial for instances of being drunk in uniform, for drunk and disorderly conduct, and for being AWOL from 2 to 5 July 1951 (4 days) and from 2 to 11 October 1951 (10 days).  This form also shows that he was punished once by Article 15, (UCMJ), for possession of illegal drugs. His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay, restriction, and confinement at hard labor for 6 months.  

10.  The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge are not present in the available records.  However, his DD Form 214 shows that on 28 March 1953, he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation
615-368, for unfitness based on traits of character rendering retention in the service as undesirable.  He was furnished an Undesirable Discharge Certificate.  He had a total of 3 years, 1 month, and 15 days of creditable service and 338 days of lost time due to AWOL and confinement.

11.  There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations.

12.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 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. 

13.  Army Regulation 615-368, in effect at the time, set forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel by reason of unfitness.  That regulation 
provided for the discharge of individuals who had demonstrated their unfitness 
by giving evidence of undesirable habits of character manifested by misconduct.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record shows that the applicant received a shrapnel wound to his left arm on 29 May 1951.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his records to show that he was awarded the Purple Heart.  There is no available evidence to show that the date of the wound is incorrect.

2.  The Board notes that the applicant’s past service achievements; however, there is no evidence in the available records, and the applicant has provided no evidence, to show that his discharge was unjust and should be upgraded.  While the Board recognizes that the applicant did receive treatment for alcoholism following his discharge and that he eventually became an alcohol counselor, these are not sufficient reasons to upgrade his discharge. 
3.  The Board also notes the applicant’s extensive absence of 338 days, which was too serious to be excused, or to warrant relief.

4.  In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  

5.  The type of separation directed and the reasons for that separation were appropriate considering all of the facts of the case.

6.  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 this requirement.

7.  In view of the foregoing findings and conclusions, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant’s records, but only as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case for the individual concerned be corrected by showing in item 27 (Awards and Decorations) of his DD Form 214 that he was awarded the Purple Heart.

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

__ro___  ___tl__  ___wm_____  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		___Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.____
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000043923	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010206	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19530328	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 615-368	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	 GRANT/DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  61		
2.  189		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.