MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           9 November 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR20000444926

	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	
	Mr. W. W. Osborn, Jr.		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Jennifer L. Prater		Chairperson	
	Mr. Orville W. Troesch, Jr.		Member	
	Ms. Barbara J. Lutz		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 earlier appeal to correct his military records by awarding him the Purple Heart. 

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that the statements of his Vietnam companions 
and the action of the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) demonstrate that he is entitled to the Purple Heart.  He submits several documents to substantiate his case, including: a copy of a 29 March 1971 letter from the VA showing a service connected disability rated at zero percent for a shrapnel wound scar over the right eye; a statement from a Vietnam companion; a report of a medical doctor; and a letter from an another Vietnam companion who relates that he was the medic on the scene.

COUNSEL CONTENDS:  In effect, counsel concurs in the applicant's presentation and requests that all reasonable doubt be resolved in the applicant's favor.

NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION:  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum prepared to reflect the Board's previous consideration of the case (AR1999019461) on 
15 September 1999.

The applicant’s submission is new evidence that requires Board consideration.

A 16 September 1998 statement from a medical doctor relates that he observed scars on both legs that the applicant attributed to shrapnel wounds.  The applicant related that he was twice wounded and that he never reported the incidents.

A statement from the medic, apparently dated 24 August 1998 relates that, as he was treating the soldier who tripped the mine, someone mentioned that the applicant was also wounded.  “I looked at him a minute, and definitely remember saying ‘Well I guess you’ll be getting the Purple Heart for this.’” 

The 5 April 2000 statement from a medically retired sergeant states that he stepped on a mine.  He reports that he lost his left leg below the knee and nearly lost his right foot.  His right leg and left arm were broken.  The applicant was knocked off his feet by the blast and sustained shrapnel wounds to his legs.  He knows the applicant was wounded and believes that he deserves the Purple Heart.  

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 by a medical officer, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.

Army Regulation 15-185 sets forth the policy and procedures for the ABCMR.  Paragraph 2-15 provides the guidance for reconsideration.  Subparagraph 
2-15(a) states that if a request for a reconsideration is received within one year of the prior consideration and the case has not been previously reconsidered, it will be resubmitted to the Board if there is evidence (including but not limited to any facts or arguments as to why relief should be granted) that was not in the record at the time of the Board’s prior consideration.  The staff of the Board is authorized to determine whether or not any such matters have been submitted.

Subparagraph 2-15(b) further provides the requirements that apply to requests for reconsideration that are received more than 1 year after the Board’s original consideration or after the Board has already reconsidered the case.  In such cases, the staff of the Board will review the request to determine if substantial relevant evidence has been submitted that shows fraud, mistake in law, mathematical miscalculation, manifest error, or if there exists substantial relevant new evidence discovered contemporaneously or within a short time after the Board’s original decision.  If the staff finds such evidence, the case will be resubmitted to the Board.  

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’s supporting evidence is noted, but the statements of individuals, while frequently useful in demonstrating the combat origin of wounds for which there is a record of treatment, are insufficient as the primary basis for an award of the Purple Heart.  Neither such statement nor scars fulfill the regulatory requirement that medical treatment be a matter of record.
 
2.  Unfortunately, there simply is no evidence of record that the applicant received medical treatment for wounds sustained 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.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

__JLP___  __BJL____  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________     GRANT FORMAL HEARING

 ___  ___   __ ___             OWT       DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000044926	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20001109	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	 	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.