MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:


         BOARD DATE: 20 AUGUST 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002067978

         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:

Ms. Melinda M. Darby		Chairperson
Mr. Roger W. Able		Member
Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		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: Reconsideration of his request that his records be corrected to reflect award of the Purple Heart.

APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he is aware that he was "accidentally" shot by another soldier but contends that he was wounded the day after an Army general was captured by enemy POWs (prisoner of wars).

He states that he does not know the "details of this incident" but sends in a document which indicates that the general was held by the prisoners for three days. He also submits a copy of his 1953 separation physical examination, which contains an annotation "wounded in action, 1 yr ago" as well as a memorandum which indicates that his injury occurred in the line of duty.

The applicant also contends that the circumstances of his injury were the same as soldiers who were wounded during an uprising of Taliban prisoners in Afghanistan. He submits a newspaper article which indicates that five U.S. soldiers were injured during the uprising by "an errant U.S. missile…" The article states all five soldiers received the Purple Heart.

The applicant maintains, in effect, that he should be awarded the Purple Heart under the "friendly fire amendment" and submits documents which discuss awards of the Purple Heart for service members "killed or wounded in action by friendly fire."

NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION: Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum prepared to reflect the Board's original consideration of his case (AR2001062726) on 20 December 2001. The submission of additional evidence, not previously seen by the Board, as well as the additional issues raised by the applicant constitutes new evidence which requires consideration by the Board.

Records available to the Board indicate the applicant was a military policeman assigned to the 164^th Military Police Processing Company in Korea. According to an original medical treatment record, contained in the applicant's service medical records, he sustained a gunshot wound to his left thigh "when he was accidentally shot by another Sgt in Barrack 7 of the 164^th MP's." According to other medical documents, which also indicate the wound was accidentally incurred, the applicant was injured on 8 May 1952, although a medical summary sheet completed on 15 May 1952 at Tokyo Army Hospital, indicates the injury occurred on 9 May 1952.

His June 1953 separation physical examination does note "wounded in action, 1 yr ago" and that the applicant was treated at the Tokyo Army Hospital. Although


the applicant's injury was determined to have occurred "in line of duty," the "wounded in action" statement on his separation examination is not supported by any of the other medical documents contained in his service medical records.

The document submitted by the applicant in support of his request, which refers to the capture of a U.S. Army general by enemy POWs during the Korean War, appears to have been authored by a retired Army officer for the September/October issue of the 5^th Regimental Combat Team Association publication. The extracted article is not dated. The article notes that Brigadier General Dodd, commander of the United Nations POW camp located at Compound 76 on the island of Koje-do (located approximately 75 miles southwest of Pusan), was taken by enemy prisoners at the compound "on the morning of 7 May 1952. The author of the article notes the general was "released unharmed approximately four days later…." There is no indication in the article that force was used by U.S. soldiers or enemy prisoners during the incident, nor any confirmation of the units that were involved or located on the compound at the time.

In the applicant's original application to the Board he submits documents which indicated that he "must have been resting from one of my guard-check rounds when I was shot" and notes that he had "no idea how it happened…."

In an undated letter to the applicant's congressional representative he noted that "sometime in mid-April 1952…[his] company was order to Koje to replace another infantry line company…as guards over a number of prisoner compounds." He stated that a "couple of weeks or so after our arrival, while I was resting between guard-check rounds, I was shot in the lower part of my left knee…." He indicated that he assumed the "shooting was accidental" and had "no idea of who did it or why it occurred."

The newspaper article, submitted by the applicant in support of his request, notes that "special forces troops were injured during an uprising last week by Taliban prisoners detained at a fortress outside the northern Afghan city of Xazar-e Sharil. While advising Northern Alliance fighters battling the prisoners, the U.S. service men were wounded by an errant U.S. missile that struck near them." The article goes on to say that "after three days, the uprising was suppressed, with nearly all the Taliban prisoners killed."

Army Regulation 600-8-4 states, in pertinent part, that line of duty investigations are conducted essentially to arrive at a determination as to whether misconduct or negligence was involved in the disease, injury, or death and if so to what degree.



Army Regulation 600-8-22 states, in pertinent part, that individuals wounded or killed as a result of "friendly fire" in the "heat of battle" will be awarded the Purple Heart as long as the "friendly" projectile or agent was released with the full intent of inflicting damage or destroying enemy troops or equipment.

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. There is no evidence, and the applicant has not submitted any, that the gun shot wound he sustained on 8 May 1952 was related in anyway to the capture of Brigadier General Dodd by enemy POWs on 7 May 1952. There is no evidence that either friendly or enemy forces used force during the period of General Dodd's capture and detention by the enemy POWs.

2. The applicant himself admitted in both his original application to the Board and in correspondence to his congressional representative that he did not know the circumstances under which he was wounded other than to note that he was "resting from one of [his] guard-check rounds." The original medical statement, contained in the applicant's original service medical records, clearly indicates the wound was accidentally incurred when another soldier in the barracks of the 164th Military Police Company shot the applicant.

3. The fact that the applicant's injury was determined to have occurred in the line of duty is not evidence to support an award of the Purple Heart. The finding merely means there was no evidence of misconduct or negligence on the part of the applicant.

4. Although the applicant's separation physical examination, completed more than a year after the applicant was injured, may note the applicant was "wounded in action," medical records completed at the time of the incident do not support that statement.

5. The conditions under which soldiers who were awarded Purple Hearts for injuries sustained during the uprising of Taliban prisoners in Afghanistan was clearly documented. The evidence in that case shows that the "errant U.S. missile that struck near" the soldiers was released in an effort to suppress the Taliban prisoners. There is no such evidence in the applicant's case.

6. The overall merits of the case, including the latest submissions and arguments are insufficient as a basis for the Board to reverse its previous decision.



7. 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

__MMD__ __RWA _ __CLG __ DENY APPLICATION

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

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002067978
SUFFIX
RECON	20020820
DATE BOARDED	YYYYMMDD
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.	107.00
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.