RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        3 NOVEMBER 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050001829


      I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record
of the proceedings 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:

|     |Mr. Thomas Howard                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. John Infante                  |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Carmen Duncan                 |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests reconsideration of his earlier appeal to correct
his  military records by award of the Purple Heart.

2.  The applicant states that “I vehemently disagree with your decision.
Apparently sitting behind a desk in Virginia does not qualify for and
understanding of in ENEMY ACTION.”

3.  The applicant provides no new evidence, but provides statements with
rhetorical questions about his service in the European Theater of
Operations (ETO) during the war.  These are clearly iterated in his
request, some of which are quoted herein.

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
AR2004105710, on 21 December 2004.

2.  The applicant entered on active duty on 8 February 1943, served in the
European Theater of Operations during World War II, and was discharged at
Indiantown Gap Military Reservation in the grade of sergeant on 8 December
1945.  His records fail to show that he was wounded as a result of hostile
action.

3.  The 21 December 2004 Board proceedings show that the applicant provided
statements of support to his request for award of the Purple Heart, all of
which indicate that the applicant injured his back while jumping clear of a
ramp from a landing craft on Omaha Beach in Normandy.

4.  In a 14 September 1984 letter to the Veterans Administration (VA), the
applicant stated that he was hospitalized shortly after the accident.  This
was a field hospital somewhere near Omaha Beach.  He stated that they were
bivouacked outside “Ver Ville Sur Mer,” and that they were dug in deep in a
field. Their foxhole was dug under a hedgerow, straw lined.  He, as well as
his buddies, contacted a terrible scabby condition on the face due to some
kind of bugs in the straw.  They were all sent to the field hospital.  His
entire face was one massive scab.  The hospitalization occurred in late
June, July, or even possibly early August.  That was the last
hospitalization that he could remember while in the ETO.  Once after that,
he had voluntarily transferred to the infantry, and he had a wart burned
off his finger with a red hot nail.  He had received treatment a few times
before but when things were about healed, up to the line he would go.  In
his letter he referred to the back injury that he received in Normandy in
1944, resulting in a permanent curvature of his spine.

5.  The applicant’s arguments:

      a.  “The sole purpose of going to the ETO was beyond a shadow of a
doubt the result of ENEMY ACTION.”

      b. “ Why did I spend 2 yrs in ETO and 1 year in US?”


      c.  “The 147 engineers hit Omaha at 7:30am on D-Day, June 6th 1944,
was that ENEMY ACTION?”


      d.  “Mounting my 30 caliber water cooled machine gun on top of the
bluff at Omaha with my squad under fear of counter attack, as the 29th and
1st Infantry were not too far inland.  General Bradley contemplated pulling
troops back off of beach, which was yet to be secured.  I suppose this was
due to a boyscout troop shooting paintballs at us…or was that the result of
ENEMY ACTION?”


      e.  “Bringing in the 155 charges for our Howitzers to hold and advance
our lines was that ENEMY ACTION?”


      f.  “The resulting injury put me in a FIELD HOSPITAL in France off the
line and 50 plus years of 24-7 excruciating pain…pray tell was that the
result of ENEMY ACTION?”

6.  The applicant continued, stating that he was “high-pressured” into
signing the WD AGO Form 53-55 (separation document).  This document shows
in item      34 (Wounds Received in Action), the entry, “None.”

7.  In referring to paragraph 16 in the Board’s 21 December 2004
proceedings, he states that the lengthy explanations verify his many
“vacations” to the medics, and that the actual wounds or causes to be
hospitalized not specifically noted was not his responsibility.  He stated
that the numerous times that he was sent to the medics by his sergeant or
lieutenant was for blood resulting in loss of time from the line.


8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides for award of the Purple Heart.  It
states that the Purple Heart 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.  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.  When contemplating an award of the Purple Heart, 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
perquisite, but is not sole justification for award.

9.  Examples of enemy-related injuries which clearly justify award of the
Purple Heart include injury caused by enemy bullet, shrapnel, or other
projectile created by enemy action; injury caused by enemy placed mine or
trap; injury caused by enemy release chemical, biological, or nuclear
agent; and injury caused by vehicle or aircraft accident resulting from
enemy fire.

10.  Examples of injuries or wounds which clearly do not qualify for award
of the Purple Heart include heat stroke, battle fatigue, disease not
directly caused by enemy agents; and accidents, to include explosive,
aircraft, vehicular, and other accidental wounding not related to or caused
by enemy action.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s statements are noted.  The Board does not disagree with
his assertions that the actions at Omaha Beach; clearing mines, booby
traps, etc., bringing in 155 charges for howitzers, and so on, were because
of ENEMY ACTION.  Nonetheless, it is presumed that those incidents did not
result in everyone involved being wounded in action or being awarded the
Purple Heart.

2.  Simply put, according to the logic put forth by the applicant, any
injury to any Soldier who served in the ETO during World War II, no matter
how slight, and no matter the circumstances, would entitle the Soldier to
the Purple Heart for being wounded as a result of enemy action.  By the
same token, and again according to his reasoning, the rash (scabby
condition) that he sustained would qualify as being wounded in action,
simply because this condition would not have occurred had it not been as a
result of ENEMY ACTION.

3.  The Board does not disparage or malign the applicant’s honorable and
faithful service that the applicant made, nor the extraordinary sacrifices
that he made for his country under dire conditions.  His sacrifices and
those of hundreds of thousands of veterans like himself can never be fully
appreciated.

4.  Nonetheless, the applicant’s injury as indicated in the 21 December
2004 Board proceedings was determined to be accidental, not as a result of
hostile action.  In his current submission to this Board, he has provided
no probative evidence or convincing argument to refute that determination.
The applicant’s request for award of the Purple Heart is not warranted.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___TH  __  ___JI ___  __CD___  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 AR2004105710, dated 21 December 2004.




                                  _____Thomas Howard______
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050001829                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20051103                                |
|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.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]