MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           27 NOVEMBER 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001060833

	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. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		Chairperson	
	Mr. Lester Echols		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		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 the application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file.

	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:  Award of the Purple Heart based on a "cold weather injury - frostbite."  In support of his request, he submits a July 2001 document from the VA indicating he was awarded disability compensation for residuals of frostbite on his feet.

PURPOSE:  To determine whether the application was submitted within the time limit established by law, and if not, whether it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records were likely lost or destroyed during the 1973 fire at the National Personnel Records Center.  Information contained herein was reconstructed from alternative sources, including information provided by the applicant.

He entered active duty on 15 March 1943.  According to files maintained by the Office of The Surgeon General, commonly referred to as SGO files, the applicant was treated for frostbite at Fort Jackson, South Carolina in December 1943. 

The applicant served in the European Theater of Operations between May 1944 and July 1945.  He was honorably discharged on 16 October 1945.  His WD AGO Form 53-55 (Enlisted Record and Report of Separation), which he authenticated, does not reflect entitlement to the Purple Heart and item 34 (wounds received in action) reflects "NONE."

Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that the Purple Heart is awarded for wounds 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.

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 fact 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.

Although the applicant may have received treatment for frostbite, there is no indication the frostbite occurred while he was actually engaged in combat.  There is no basis for an award of the Purple Heart.
Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice.  Failure to file within 3 years may be excused by a correction board if it finds it would be in the interest of justice to do so.

DISCUSSION:  The alleged error or injustice was, or with reasonable diligence should have been discovered on 16 October 1945, the date he was discharged from active duty and signed his report of separation.  However, in view of the fact that the board was not established until 2 January 1947 the applicant’s 3 year period in which to file an application for correction of military records expired on 
2 January 1950, 3 years from the date the Board was established.

The application is dated 27 July 2001 and the applicant has not explained or otherwise satisfactorily demonstrated by competent evidence that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to apply within the time allotted.

DETERMINATION:  The subject application was not submitted within the time required.  The applicant has not presented and the records do not contain sufficient justification to conclude that it would be in the interest of justice to grant the relief requested or to excuse the failure to file within the time prescribed by law.  Prior to reaching this determination the Board looked at the applicant's entire file.  It was only after all aspects of his case had been considered and it had been concluded that there was no basis to recommend a correction of his record that the Board considered the statute of limitations.  Had the Board determined that an error or injustice existed it would have recommended relief in spite of the applicant's failure to submit his application within the three-year time limit.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  EXCUSE FAILURE TO TIMELY FILE

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__AAO__  __LE____  __JTM __  CONCUR WITH DETERMINATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001060833	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20011127	
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.	142.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.