MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           8 January 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001061921

	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. William Blakely		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Luther L. Santiful		Chairperson	
	Mr. Roger Able		Member	
	Mr. Terry L. Placek		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 he be awarded the Purple Heart (PH).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that his Enlisted Record and Report of Separation (WD AGO Form 53-55) does not show the PH as an authorized award.  He further states he was wounded in the European Theater of Operations (ETO) while assigned to General Patton’s unit.

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

On 6 May 1942, he entered the Army and was trained and served as a heavy automotive equipment operator.  He served in the ETO from 18 September 
1943 to 15 November 1945, and he participated in the Normandy, Rhineland, and Northern France campaigns of World War II.  

The applicant’s record also shows that during his active duty tenure he earned the following awards:  European-African-Middle Eastern Service Medal; Good Conduct Medal; and World War II Victory Medal.  There is no indication in the record that he ever earned or was awarded the PH.  The highest rank he attained while serving on active duty was Technician 5th Grade and he was honorably released from active duty on 29 November 1945.  

The record contains a Report of Physical Examination of Enlisted Personnel Prior to Discharge, Release From Active Duty or Retirement (WD AGO Form 38), which documents the separation medical examination taken by the applicant during his separation processing.  This document contains no reference to the applicant sustaining a combat wound or any indication that he was entitled to receive the PH.  

Army Regulation 600-8-22 prescribes the policy for the Army awards program. It states, in pertinent part, that the PH 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

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 is entitled to receive the PH for wounds he received in action.  However, it finds insufficient evidence to support this claim.  By regulation, in order to award the PH there must be evidence to show an individual was wounded in action, the wound was treated by military medical personnel, and that treatment must have been made a matter of official record.  

2.  The evidence of record gives no indication that the applicant ever sustained a combat wound or that he was ever awarded the PH.  Further, his separation medical examination, that cleared him for separation, made no reference to his being wounded or injured in action or of his qualifying for the PH.  Therefore, lacking independent evidence to the contrary, the Board finds an insufficient evidentiary basis to show that the applicant meets the regulatory criteria necessary to be awarded the PH and it is therefore compelled to deny the requested relief. 

3.  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

___LLS__  __RA___  __TLP___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001061921	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2002/01/08	
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.	107.0056	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.