IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  26 October 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100009582 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests award of the Purple Heart (PH). 

2.  The applicant states he was wounded in action on or about 1 December 1944, during World War II when he received a shrapnel wound to his face.  He claims the records were destroyed during an enemy counter-attack and although he received medical treatment by a front line medical corpsman (MEDIC), who told him he just got the PH, no official documentation of his wound was posted to his official military record.  

3.  The applicant further states he was later evacuated to England for treatment for trench foot and during this period no medical officer documented his earlier shrapnel wound. He states unknown to him at the time, this omission of official documentation of his wounding prevented automatic award of the PH.    

4.  The applicant refers to a book written by members of his unit referring to his hospitalization and provides a self-authored letter and the 10 exhibits identified as enclosures in support of his application. 



CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant’s military record is 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 considered using reconstructed records maintained at the NPRC which include a WD Form 372A (Final Payment Work Sheet), Office of The Surgeon General (OTSG) Hospital Admission Record, and Honorable Discharge Certificate; and the documents provided by the applicant. 

3.  The applicant’s WD AGO Form 100 shows he entered active duty on
 31 August 1943, and that he served in military occupational specialties (MOSs) 745 (Rifleman/Squad Leader) and 1736 (Platoon Sergeant).  It also shows he served with a Cavalry Reconnaissance Squadron in the European Theater of Operations (ETO) during World War II.  

4.  The applicant’s Honorable Discharge Certificate shows he was honorably separated in the rank of staff sergeant (SSG) on 26 March 1946.  The applicant’s WD AGO Form 53-55 (Enlisted Record of Service-Honorable Discharge) is not in the NPRC file and was not made available by the applicant. There are no documents available confirming the awards received by the applicant or that document his being wounded in action during World War II.  

5.  The OTSG Hospital Report in the applicant’s NPRC file confirms he was hospitalized in the ETO on 17 January 1945, and that he was treated for trench foot.  This document does not indicate treatment for any other conditions or for a wound received as a result of enemy action.  



6.  The applicant provides a Western Union casualty notification telegram that informed his mother he was slightly injured in action in Belgium on 17 January 1945, and that provided his mother the hospital address and details of the applicant’s injury and hospitalization.  

7.  The applicant also provides excerpts from a book about his unit that identify the conditions they faced and that related to his medical evacuation.  He also provides excepts from his notebook that indicate after a medical attendant treated his bloody face and told him he would receive a PH, a captain evacuated with him made fun of the fact he was sent to the aid station for his feet and was receiving a PH for the wound to his face. 

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states the Purple Heart is awarded for a wound sustained while in action against an enemy or 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 medical personnel, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.

9.  The Army awards regulation in effect until 23 August 1951, provided for awarding the PH to members who were severely frostbitten while actually engaged in combat.  An Army historical document discussing the award of the PH for frostbite injuries makes clear numerous specific points one of which was that while as a general rule the PH was normally authorized for frostbite while in combat, award of the PH was excluded for trench foot injuries.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contention he should be awarded the PH for a shrapnel wound to the face he sustained during combat on or about 1 December 1944 has been carefully considered.  However, by regulation, in order to support award of the PH there must be evidence not only that a member was wounded as a result of enemy action, but also that the wound required treatment by military medical personnel and this treatment was made a matter of official record.  

2.  In this case, while the applicant’s notebook entry appears to support his assertion he was treated for a shrapnel wound to the face, the book excepts, letter home and casualty telegram confirm only that he was hospitalized and provide no confirmation of treatment for a shrapnel wound.  



3.  Further, the OTSG Hospital Record in the NPRC file confirms only that the applicant was hospitalized and treated for trench foot, and provides no indication that he suffered or was treated for a shrapnel wound.  As a result, absent any official record confirming he required treatment for a shrapnel wound to the face, the regulatory burden of proof necessary to support award of the PH has not been satisfied in this case.  Therefore, it would not serve the interest of all those who served during World War II and who faced similar circumstances to support award of the PH in this case.  

4.  The applicant and all others concerned should know that this action related to award of the PH 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.  

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 for correction of the records of the individual concerned.




      _______ _   _X______   ___
               CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100009582



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100009582



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1