IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 5 January 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110010885 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests reconsideration of the earlier petition requesting the former service member (FSM) be awarded the Purple Heart (PH). 2. The applicant states unless the Board is rejecting his notarized statement, it must be concluded the FSM was wounded as he stated. He further states that regardless of the negatives, he believes the FSM, now his family since the FSM died last month, deserves his PH. 3. The applicant provides a self-authored letter in support of his request. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20100022994 on 12 April 2011. 2. During the original review of the case, the Board determined the regulatory criteria necessary to support award of the PH had not been satisfied in the FSM’s case. It noted that notwithstanding the assertion of counsel, the Office of The Surgeon General (OTSG) Hospital Admission Records documenting the treatment received by the FSM between January and July 1945 showed no treatment for combat-related wounds. 3. The applicant now submits a self-authored statement as new argument in which he indicates the FSM became a member of the Ordnance unit at about the time his accident occurred should be prima facie evidence that he was wounded then. He claims combat engineers are never routinely sent to an ordnance unit and it should be obvious, if the dots were connected, the date he went to the Ordnance unit was the date he left the hospital. He further states unless his statement is rejected, it must be concluded the FSM was wounded as he stated. 4. The FSM’s military service records were lost in a fire at the National Personnel Records Center in 1973, as noted by the Board in the original decisional document. The reconstructed National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) file does contain a WD AGO Form 53-55 (Enlisted Record and Report of Separation) and OTSG Hospital Admission Records documenting the following admissions and treatment of the FSM in the European Theater of Operations (ETO) between January and June 1945: * 27 January 1945, treated for Psychoneurosis, neurasthenia and chronic dislocation (51 days) * 23 April 1945, treated for Pyelitis * 6 June 1945, treated for hernia, inguinal (51 days) 5. There are no documents, including the OTSG Hospital Admission Records, that indicate the FSM was ever wounded as a result of enemy action. All treatment the FSM received was coded as disease and was not coded battle related. 6. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) contains the Army’s awards policy. Paragraph 2-8 contains guidance on award of the PH. It states in order to support award of the PH there must be evidence that the wound for which the award is being made was received as a result of enemy action; that it required treatment by military medical personnel; and a record of this treatment must have been made a matter of official record. Paragraph 2-8h lists injuries or wounds which clearly do not justify award of the PH. Included in this list are disease, accidents not caused by enemy action and battle fatigue. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant’s request for reconsideration of the earlier petition to award the PH to the FSM has again been carefully considered. However, there remains insufficient evidence to support award of the PH in this case. 2. The evidence confirms only that the applicant was treated for non-battle related diseases while in the ETO. There are no documents or records that indicate any of this treatment was the result of the FSM being wounded as a result of enemy action. The governing regulation stipulates that disease and accidents not caused by enemy action and battle fatigue clearly do not support award of the PH. As a result, even if the FSM was injured in the field as a result of an accident it would not support award of the PH. 3. Absent any evidence of record corroborating the applicant’s assertions, the new argument he provides fails to provide a basis for amendment of the original Board decision in this case, or that supports award of the PH. The applicant and all others concerned should know that this decision related to award of the PH in no way diminishes the sacrifices made by the FSM in service to our Nation. The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of the FSM's service in arms. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____X____ ____X____ ____X____ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20100022994, dated 12 April 2011. ____________X___________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110010885 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110010885 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1