RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        22 MARCH 2007
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060005695


      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. Gerard W. Schwartz            |     |Acting Director      |
|     |                                  |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |                                  |     |Chairperson          |
|     |                                  |     |Member               |
|     |                                  |     |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 that the records of her deceased husband, a
former service member (FSM), be corrected by changing his DD Form 214
(Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show
he was promoted to the pay grade of E-7, and that he received the Purple
Heart.

2.  The applicant states that once her husband passed the test for Sergeant
Major he received his promotion to E-7.  However, his DD Form 214 (Armed
Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) was never
corrected.  Her husband had been trying to correct his rank for the past 22
years.
She also states that the FSM was a Prisoner of War (POW).

3.  The applicant provides a copy of a request for an identification card,
an unsigned statement concerning a physical examination conducted by a
physician at the Paralyzed Veterans of America National Service Center, a
rating decision by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), VA Form 3101
(Request for Information), a copy of the FSM‘s identification card, and two
separation documents, in support of her request.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The FSM was originally inducted into the Army of the United States on
       12 March 1945, and enlisted in the Regular Army on 10 December 1945
for a period of 3 years.

2.  The FSM was promoted to the pay grades of E-4 and E-5 on 28 June 1949,
and 26 November 1952, respectively.  There is no documentation that show he
was promoted above the grade of E-5.

3.  On 11 October 1962, he was convicted by a summary court-martial of
stealing government property.  He was sentenced to a forfeiture of $30.00.

4.  On 19 March 1963, the FSM's commander submitted a request to bar him
from reenlisting.  His commander's recommendation was based on the
applicant's conviction by summary court-martial, his receiving Article 15
punishment for failing to register his privately owned vehicle, and his
receiving approximately 20 letters of indebtedness and numerous telephone
calls from creditors for failing to pay his debts.  The recommendation
stated that elimination action had been initiated due to the applicant's
existing medical condition that could not be properly diagnosed due to his
obesity, and that he had been hospitalized for diabetes.
5.  On 22 March 1963, the FSM acknowledged notification of his commander's
recommendation to bar him from reenlisting, and elected not to make a
statement.

6.  On 25 April 1963, he received nonjudicial punishment under the
provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for making a
payment of a debt with a certain check, that was dishonored because of
insufficient funds.  His punishment was a forfeiture of $32.00 of his pay.

7.  On 26 April 1963, a Medical Evaluation cleared the FSM for separation,
with a notation of diabetes.

8.  The facts and circumstances concerning the FSM's discharge are not in
the available records.  However, his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the
United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) shows he was discharged
under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, SPN 201, for expiration of
his term of service.  His character of service was shown as under honorable
conditions.

9.  Item 27 of the FSM’s 17 May 1963 separation document and Item 29 of the
FSM’s 17 May 1951 separation document (Wounds Received as a Result of
Action with Enemy Forces) shows no entries of any wounds received.

10.  There is no documentation in the available records which shows that
the FSM sustained wounds or was treated for wounds incurred as a result of
hostile action, or that he served in a combat zone.

11.  There is no documentation in the available records to show the FSM was
a Prisoner of War (POW).

12.  The applicant submits an application for an identification card, which
refers to the FSM as having the rank of SFC (sergeant first class) and the
pay grade of
E-7, as proof of his being in the higher grade.

13.  The applicant submits documents showing that the FSM had been
diagnosed with diabetes.

14.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent
part, 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, the wound must have required
treatment by a medical officer, and the medical treatment must have been
made a matter of official record.


DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  There are no medical records available which show the FSM was wounded
or treated for wounds as a result of hostile action during his military
service to justify award of the Purple Heart.

2.  There is no evidence that shows the FSM was promoted to a grade higher
than pay grade E-5.  The application for an identification card submitted
by the applicant showing the FSM’s rank as sergeant first class (SFC) and
his pay grade as E-7 is insufficient evidence of his correct rank on his DD
Form 214.

3.  There is no evidence in the records to substantiate the applicant's
claim that the FSM was a POW.

4.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must
show, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in
error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would
satisfy that requirement.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__LS  ___  ___JM __  __RV ___  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 for correction of the
records of the individual concerned.



                                  ______
                                            CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060005695                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20070322                                |
|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.                      |131.00                                  |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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