MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            12 April 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999031319

	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. Joseph A. Adriance 		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Robert G. Hinkle		Chairperson	
	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		Member	
	Mr. James P. Steuve		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 he should receive the PH because of a shrapnel wound over the left eye which he sustained on or about 12 or 
13 December 1944, in Rohrbach, France.  He claims that he was bandaged by the battery medic and he continued combat duty.  He states that the field medic made a mistake in not reporting this treatment to the first sergeant to be included in the morning report of the unit.  He goes on to say that he does not want compensation for this injustice but simply wants to be awarded the PH.  He indicates that two members of his unit submitted sworn statements to the VA in Nashville, Tennessee, who after reviewing the evidence awarded a service connection to the injury received as a result of this wound. 

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

He continuously served on active duty from 15 April 1942 until he was honorably discharged on 9 December 1945.  The applicant’s official military personnel file was not available to the Board for review.  A fire destroyed approximately 
18 million service members’ records at the National Personnel Records Center in 1973 and it is believed the majority of the applicant’s records were destroyed in that fire. 

The applicant provided a copy of his War Department Form War Department (WD) Adjutant General Office (AGO) Form 53-55 (Honorable Discharge).  This document shows that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 15 April 1942 and that he arrived in the European Theater of Operations (ETO) in October 1944.  It also indicates that he subsequently participated in the Rhineland and Central Europe Campaigns of World War II.  

On 9 December 1945, the applicant was honorably discharged, in the rank of sergeant, after completing 1 year, 2 months, and 16 days of service in the ETO and a total of 3 years, 7 months, and 26 days of active military service.  Block 
34 (Wounds Received in Action) of his WD AGO Form 53-55 is blank, which indicates that he was not wounded in action during his tenure in service.  Block 56 (Signature of Person Being Separated) contains the applicant’s signature, which serves to authenticate the data contained on the form at the time it was issued.  

Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning individual military awards.  Paragraph 2-8 (Purple Heart) indicates that the PH is awarded to any member of an Armed Force of the United States who has been wounded in any action against an enemy of the United States.

Paragraph 2-8 b (2) states that a wound is defined as an injury to any part of the body from an outside force or agent sustained under one or more of the conditions listed above.  A physical lesion is not required, however, the wound for which the award is made must have required treatment by a medical officer and records of medical treatment for wounds or injuries received in action must have been made a matter of official record.  

Paragraph 2-8 b (3) states that when contemplating an award of the PH, the key issue that commanders must take into consideration is the degree to which the enemy caused the injury.  The fact that the proposed recipient was participating in direct or indirect combat operations is a necessary prerequisite, but is not sole justification for award.  It also stipulates 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 wishes to congratulate the applicant on his outstanding record of service and thank him for his significant contributions to this Nation in a time of War.  However, notwithstanding his contentions and the third party witness statements he provided to the VA, a careful review of the available records failed to show that he was ever treated by medical personnel for a wound received in action against a hostile force.  Therefore, the Board has no basis for granting the relief requested.  

2.  The regulatory criteria for awarding the PH is quite specific and requires that the wound for which the award is being received must be supported by records of medical treatment for the wound received in action, and must have been made a matter of official Army records.  Given the applicant’s medical records contain no evidence of medical treatment for a wound and the fact that he authenticated his official separation document, which showed he received no wounds in action during his tenure in service, the Board determined relief is not warranted in this case.

3.  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 the aforementioned requirement.

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:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__rgh___  ___jps___  ___be___  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999031319	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/04-16	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1945/12/09	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 615-365	
DISCHARGE REASON	Demobilization	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1. 61	107.0015	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.