MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF
        


         BOARD DATE: 29 May 2003
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002083194

         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. Lestor Echols		Member
Mr. Frank C. Jones, II		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 the records of her spouse, a deceased Former Service Member (FSM), be corrected to reflect award of the Purple Heart (PH).

APPLICANT STATES: In effect, the deceased FSM was wounded in action, while attempting to cross the Rhine River in Europe, on 15 December 1944. She states that the FSM was awarded the PH at a field hospital, but the paper work required to complete the award processing was never submitted. She states that due to a shortage of medals, the PH medal was awarded to injured soldiers and later retrieved to be used again for presentation to other wounded soldiers. In support of her application, she submits a certificate of death, Statement of Medical History (AGRAC Form 1-313), marriage certificate, Veterans Administration (VA) Claim, and a copy of the deceased FSM’s separation document (WD AGO Form 53-55).

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

The applicant’s military records were lost or destroyed in the National Personnel Records Center fire in 1973. The information herein was gleaned from a copy of the deceased FSM’s WD AGO Form 53-55, an AGRAC Form 1-313, and the Veterans Administration (VA) Claim.

The applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-55 shows that he was inducted into the Army and entered active duty on 8 December 1942. He continuously served in that status until being honorably separated on 12 December 1945. It also shows that he was trained and served in military occupational specialty 931 (Truck Driver Heavy), and that he held the rank of technician fifth class (Tec 5) on the date of his separation.

The applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-55 also confirms that he served overseas in the European Theater of Operations (ETO), and that he participated in the Rhineland campaign of World War II. It also shows that during his tenure on active duty, he earned the following awards: European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal with 1 bronze service star; American Theater Ribbon; Good Conduct Medal; and World War II Victory Medal. The PH is not included in the list of authorized awards contained in this separation document. Item 34 (Wounds Received In Action) contains the entry “NONE”, which indicates that he was not wounded in action during his active duty tenure. The applicant signed the WD AGO Form 53-55 in Item 56 (Signature of Person Being Separated), thereby verifying that the information contained in the document was correct at the time it was prepared and issued.

---

The AGRAC 1-313 provided by the applicant contains a history of the FSM’s hospitalization and medical treatment during his period of enlistment. This form shows that the FSM received medical treatment for a fracture and dislocation of the right elbow, that he accidentally incurred on 15 December 1944. The VA claim award letter, dated 28 January 1948, issued by the VA Regional Office, Louisville, Kentucky, awarded the deceased FSM a service connected disability for arthritis in his right elbow. However, neither of these documents confirm that the FSM’s injury was the result of enemy action.

In the processing of this case, the historical files of the 500^th Field Artillery,
14^th Armored Division maintained at the National Archives, were reviewed by a member of the Board staff. This search of the historical records failed to produce evidence that would indicate that the deceased FSM was ever wounded or injured in action, or that he was recommended for or awarded the PH while he was assigned in the ETO.

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 PH. It states, in pertinent part, that the PH is awarded to any member wounded or killed while engaged in action against an armed enemy or hostile force. Paragraph 2-8b 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 the records of her deceased husband, a FSM, should be corrected to show he was awarded the PH for injuries he received on 15 December 1944. However, it finds insufficient evidence to support this claim.

2. By regulation, in order to award 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.

3. The available evidence fails to show that the FSM was ever wounded or injured in action, or that he was ever recommended for or awarded the PH. The AGRAC Form 1-313 and the VA disability claim provided by the applicant confirms that the FSM was injured as a result of an accident, but it does not show that the injury was received in action against the enemy. Further, the unit historical files maintained at the National Archives fail to show the FSM was ever wounded or injured as a result of hostile action, or that he was ever awarded the PH.

4. The Board wishes to acknowledge the deceased FSM’s outstanding service and contribution to his country during World War II. However, based on the lack of evidence to satisfy the regulatory burden of proof necessary to award the PH, the Board is compelled to deny the requested relief. This action is taken in the interest of fairness to all those who served in the World War II and who faced similar circumstances.

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

__FCJ__ __LS___ __LE___ DENY APPLICATION

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

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002083194
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
DATE OF DISCHARGE
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION	DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 61	107.0015
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.