RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  4 April 2008
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070016771 


	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.




	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, in effect, reconsideration of his earlier petition to be awarded the Purple Heart (PH).  

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was wounded in action in Korea in November or December of 1951, when he received a slight wound that he took care of himself.  

3.  The applicant provides the following documents in support of his reconsideration request:  Self-Authored Letters, dated 26 December 2007, 
3 January 2008, and 17 January 2008; Third-Party Letter (Daughter), dated 
31 October 2007; Statement in Support of Claim (VA Form 21-4138), dated 
24 December 2007; Clinical Record Cover Sheet (DD Form 481), dated 17 July 1953; Medical Disposition Form , dated 17 July 1953; Clinical Record (SF 500), dated 10 July 1953; Report of Medical Examination (SF 86), dated 14 December 1953; Supplemental Record (WD AGO Form 8-26), dated 20 December 1951;  Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Fact Sheet (PTSD); San Diego Sleep Medicine Polysomnogram Report, dated 14 October 2006; and Stressed Out Vets Weekly Standard Magazine Article, dated 21 August 2006.  

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 AR20070007623, on 18 October 2007.  

2.  As indicated in the original review, the applicant’s military records are not available to the Board for review.  A fire destroyed approximately 18 million service members’ records at the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) in 1973.  It is believed that the applicant’s records were lost or destroyed in that fire. This case is being reviewed based on documents remaining in a reconstructed NPRC file, which includes the applicant's DD Form 214, and the documents provided by the applicant.  

3.  During its original review of the case, the Board found no evidence to corroborate the applicant's claim that he was wounded in action.  It further determined that the reconstructed Office of The Surgeon General (OTSG) Hospital Admission Record pertaining to the applicant also failed to show he was wounded in action.  As a result, the Board concluded there was insufficient evidence to support granting relief.  
4.  The applicant provides several self-authored statements outlining his service and the circumstances under which he claims to have been wounded in action.  He also provides medical treatment records from a hospital in Japan pertaining to his treatment for a fever of undetermined origin (possibly malaria) in July 1953.  He also provides a SF 86 that documents a physical examination he took in December of 1953, which contains notes, which could have been extracted from military medical records or could have been obtained through an interview with the applicant regarding his medical history.  These notes indicate he was treated for a shrapnel wound to his right shoulder at a Mobile Surgical Hospital (MASH) in Korea in 1951.  The SF 86 provides no information regarding how the shrapnel wound in question was received, or the circumstances surrounding this wounding. 

5.  The applicant also provides a third-party letter from the applicant's daughter, provided on behalf of her mother, the applicant's wife.  This letter indicates that the applicant and his wife were married in Japan on 7 March 1953, and that several months later, her father woke from his sleep terrified and her mother called an Army ambulance to transport him to the hospital.  She explains that her mother was unable to see the applicant and was informed his problems were related to the war.  He also provides a VA Fact Sheets and a Weekly Standard Magazine article related to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and Sleep Apnea Syndrome.  

6.  The applicant's separation document (DD Form 214) shows he was inducted in to the Army and entered active duty on 15 March 1951.  It also shows he was honorably separated, in the rank of private first class, on 15 December 1953.  The list of awards contained in Item 27 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded) does not include the PH, and Item 29 (Wounds Received As A Result of Action with Enemy Forces) contains the entry "None."  The applicant authenticated the DD Form 214 with his signature in Item 48 (Signature of Person Being Separated) on the date of his separation.  

7.  The reconstructed NPRC record is void of any orders or other documents that indicate the applicant was ever recommended for or awarded the PH by proper authority while serving on active duty, or of any medical treatment records that confirm he was treated for a wound he received as a result of enemy action while serving in Korea.  

8.  During the processing of this case, a member of the Board staff reviewed the Department of the Army (DA) Korean War Casualty Roster.  There is no entry pertaining to the applicant on this list.  

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes the Army's awards policy.  Paragraph 2-8 contains guidance on award of the PH.  It states, in pertinent part, that 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 medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record. The regulation provides examples of wounds or injuries that clearly do not support award of the PH.  Included in these examples are PTSD, Jump injuries not caused by enemy action, and accidental wounding not related to or caused by enemy action.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's request for reconsideration of his earlier petition to be awarded the PH and the supporting documents he submitted as new evidence were carefully considered.  However, there is still insufficient evidence to support his claim.  

2.  By regulation, 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 and received treatment by military medical personnel, and a record of this medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.  

3.  The applicant provides medical treatment documents that confirm that while he was on active duty, he was treated for a fever of unknown origin in Japan in 1953.  He also provides a report of medical examination completed in December 1953, which contains notes indicating that he was treated for a shrapnel wound at a MASH in Korea in 1951; however, this document gives no indication that this wound was received a result of enemy action, or that this treatment was documented in his military medical record, and was not just simply the result of a medical history interview with the applicant.  

4.  The applicant's reconstructed NPRC file contains no orders or other documents that indicate the applicant was ever recommended for or awarded the PH by proper authority while serving on active duty, or medical treatment records that show he was ever treated for a combat related wound.  


5.  Further, the PH is not included in the list of awards contained in Item 27 of the applicant's DD Form 214, and Item 29 contains the entry "None," which indicates he was never wounded in action.  The applicant authenticated the DD Form 214 with his signature on the date of his separation.  In effect, his signature was his verification that the information contained on the separation document, to include the Item 27 and Item 29 entries, was correct at the time the DD Form 214 was prepared and issued.  

6.  Finally, the applicant's name is not included on the Korean War Casualty Roster, the official DA list of Korea battle casualties.  Therefore, absent any evidence on file or provided by the applicant that confirms he received the shrapnel wound in question as a result of enemy action, or that shows he was ever wounded in action while serving in Korea, the regulatory burden of proof necessary to support award of the PH still has not been satisfied in this case.  

7.  The applicant and all others concerned should know that this action in no way diminishes the sacrifices made by the applicant in service to our Nation.  The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of his service in arms.  

8.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement or that would support amendment of the original Board decision in this case.  

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 AR20070007623, dated 18 October 2007.  




_____x____
          CHAIRPERSON