MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           23 October 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001061652

	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. Joseph A. Adriance		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Shirley L. Powell		Chairperson	
	Mr. Allen L. Raub		Member	
	Mr. Thomas E. O’Shaughnessy, Jr.		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:  In effect, that a third Purple Heart (PH) be added to his record. 

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was wounded in action (WIA) twice on 16 July 1952, in separate engagements, roughly 1 hour apart.  He claims that the first wound was from an enemy grenade and the second was a bullet wound; however, the bullet wound was not entered in his record.  Further, he contends that his medical records from the Mobile Army Surgical Hospital (MASH) in Korea and the Army Hospital in Japan can verify his claim.  He indicates that he was treated for the shrapnel wound and a broken rib cage; however, because the bullet had lodged too near his spine to be removed it was not treated and in fact is still in his body.  He claims several attending physicians were involved in the decision not to remove the bullet because it would be encapsulated in due course and would cause no harm, which over time seems to have been the correct decision.  He indicates he has known these facts all along and his decision to apply at this late date is because it has only been in later years that he began to give thought to his service in Korea.  Finally, he comments that since he was wounded a total of three times it would be in the interest of justice to consider his application at this late date. 

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

On 9 August 1951, he entered active duty as a United States Army Reserve (USAR) second lieutenant (2LT).  On 11 June 1951, he arrived in Korea and was assigned to 5th Infantry Regiment as a platoon leader.  He served in Korea from June 1953 until March 1953.

The record contains two Record of Award of Decoration Forms (AGO Forms 0708) confirming the applicant was awarded two PHs.  The first for being WIA, in North Korea, on 30 June 1952.  The second, which pertains to the date in question, for being WIA, in the vicinity of Haan-Myon, North Korea, on 16 July 1952.  

A Casualty Report (FEC AGO Form 241A) on file that was prepared by the applicant’s unit, the 5th Infantry Regiment, dated 18 July 1952, indicates that he was WIA at approximately 0354 hours, on 16 July 1952, in North Korea.  It further explains that the applicant was leading a patrol into enemy territory when it was ambushed and he was wounded in the right shoulder by fragments from an enemy grenade.  It also indicates that he was medically evacuated to the 8209th MASH; however, this report makes no mention of a second bullet wound or of a separate engagement on the same date. 

On 11 September 1952, a Casualty Report (FEC AGO 241), prepared by medical officials at the 382nd General Hospital, contained the following synopsis of the facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s wound:  missile, shell fragments, penetrating, right upper back, no artery or nerve involvement, incurred 0345 hours, 16 July 1952, Haan-Myaon, North Korea, WIA, when struck by enemy grenade fire.  This report makes no mention of a separate bullet wound or second engagement on the same date this wound was incurred. 

The record contains a separation document (DD Form 214) issued to the applicant for this particular period of active duty, from 9 August 1951 to 7 August 1953, which was authenticated by the applicant with his signature.  It confirms that he earned the following awards during this period of active duty:  Bronze Star Medal with Valor Device; Combat Infantryman Badge; Korean Service Medal; United Nations Service Medal; and PH with 1st Oak Leaf Cluster, denoting two awards of the PH.  There is no evidence of record to show the applicant contested the information contained in this document when it was issued or in the ensuing 48 plus years. 

Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning individual military awards.  Paragraph 2-8 contains the regulatory guidance pertaining to awarding the Purple Heart.  It states, in pertinent part, that the Purple Heart is awarded to any member wounded or killed while engaged in action against an armed enemy or hostile force.  

Paragraph 2-8b (1) specifies, in pertinent part,  that not more than one PH will be awarded for more than one wound received from the same missile, force, explosion, or agent.  Paragraph 2-8b (2) defines a wound as an injury to any part of the body from an outside force or agent while engaged in action against the enemy.  It also specifically states that in order to support awarding a member the PH, it is necessary to establish that the wound, for which the award is being made, required treatment by a medical officer.  This treatment must be supported by records of medical treatment for the wound or injury received in action, and must have been made a matter of 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 Board notes the applicant’s contention that he was WIA twice on 16 July 1952, once from shrapnel from an enemy grenade and once from a bullet in two separate engagements an hour apart.  However, it is unable to find evidentiary support for this claim. 

2.  By regulation, not more than 1 PH is awarded for wounds received from the same missile, force, explosion, or agent.  Further, to support awarding the PH it is necessary to establish that the wound required treatment by a medical officer and this treatment must be supported by medical records and made a matter of official record.  

3.  While the Board does not question the applicant’s interpretation of the events of 16 July 1952, or of the wound(s) he received on that date, it finds insufficient evidence of record or independent evidence provided by him that supports his claim of entitlement to a second PH for a second wound from a separate engagement on 16 July 1952.  

4.  The medical evidence of record in this case, which consists of Casualty Reports prepared and submitted by both the applicant’s unit and by hospital medical officials, confirm only that he was WIA at 0345 hours, on 16 July 1952, near Haan-Myaon, North Korea, when he was struck by enemy grenade fire.  In addition, the official records indicate that subsequent to being WIA from an enemy grenade he was medically evacuated.  Finally, there are no official record entries made by either unit or hospital medical personnel that make mention of a separate bullet wound or engagement on that same date.  Therefore, the Board regrettably is compelled to deny the requested relief. 

5.  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

__SLP__  __ALR___  __TEO___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001061652	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2001/10/23	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	N/A	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	N/A	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	N/A 	
DISCHARGE REASON	N/A	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  61	107.0015	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.