| Ms. L. L. Harrison | Analyst |
| Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr. | Chairperson | |
| Mr. John H. Kern | Member | |
| Mr. Ernest W. Lutz, Jr. | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: Reconsideration of his application to correct his records by awarding him the Purple Heart with two oak leaf clusters.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he received a frostbite to his right foot during combat operations against enemy forces in Europe during World War II.
He also states that he was wounded from a shell fragment to his right shin and he sustained a injury to his back when he was driving a tank and the tank hit a mine. He contends that the VA has confirmed the nature of the wounds by granting him service connection.
NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION: Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum of consideration (MOC) prepared to reflect the Board's original consideration of his case on
17 July 1996 (COPY ATTACHED).
The applicant submits a VA Rating Decision dated 11 August 1996, awarding him a combined evaluation of 60% for service connected disabilities including residuals of cold injury, right foot and scar, residuals of laceration, right shin. Applicant also submits a personal chronology of the incidents and a Certificate of Merit awarded to him for his duty as a tank commander.
These documents were not available to the Board previously and constitute new evidence that requires Board review.
Army Regulation 600-8-22, provides, in pertinent part, that the Purple Heart is awarded for a wound sustained while in action against the enemy or as a result of hostile action. AR 672-5-1, paragraph 2-15.1, provides, in pertinent part, that the wound must have required treatment by a medical officer, and the medical treatment 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 applicant failed to submit sufficient convincing evidence to overcome the evidence of record cited in the original MOC. Especially, in light of the fact that,
on that occasion, he did not even mention the cold injury to his right great toe.
2. The VA granting of benefits based only on the applicant’s statement is insufficient to fulfill the regulatory requirements of receipt of
treatment by a medical officer, and that the treatment is a matter of official record.
3. The overall merits of the case, including the latest submissions and arguments are insufficient as a basis for the Board to reverse its previous decision.
4. 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
_RVO___ __JHK__ __EWL __ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2000037244 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20000503 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 107.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050006992C070206
The applicant's separation medical examination stated that the applicant sustained trench foot to both feet which bothered him since December of 1944. The evidence in this case indicates that the applicant sustained cold weather injuries to both feet diagnosed by military medical authorities as "trench foot." Evidence of record shows that the applicant was diagnosed by medical authorities at the time of his separation and subsequently by DVA medical authorities with residuals of "trench foot."
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074396C070403
The applicant contends in his letter that a 9 December 1999 letter from the Army Board for Correction of Military Records refers to the requirements for award of the Purple Heart contained in Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards). The DVA rating decision states that the applicant’s service personnel records show that he served in Korea in the winter. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) currently governs award of the Purple Heart and states that the Purple Heart is awarded for a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140000592
His Certificate of Disability for Discharge, dated 19 November 1945, shows the same diagnosis as the Clinical Record Brief and adds that date of onset of injury occurred in November 1944 and he became unfit for duty 18 October 1945. The applicant states he is entitled to award of the Purple Heart for a shrapnel wound he sustained to his right leg while a Prisoner of War. Therefore, the flesh wound he received to his right ankle should be considered to be the result of "friendly fire" and,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001059168C070421
The affidavit and those statements, however, were not included as part of the applicant’s petition to the Board and were not in available records. Clearly the applicant sustained a cold weather injury to his feet during the Battle of the Bulge which was sufficiently severe to warrant his hospitalization for nearly two months and for the VA to subsequently award him disability compensation. While the medical diagnosis of trenchfoot and frostbite was widely debated during World War II, as...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070013299
Counsel states, in effect, the applicant believes he is entitled to the Purple Heart and was not previously awarded it because of insufficient evidence in his military records. US Army Human Resources Command operating personnel stated that unfortunately, a VA finding of service-connection for a disability, or disabilities, was insufficient evidence for entitlement to the Purple Heart because not all service-connected disabilities are the result of enemy action. Historic award records for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060009881
He claims these medical treatment records were not considered by the Army Board for Corrections of Military Records (ABCMR) during its original review of his case, and he asks for reconsideration of his request for the PH based on these medical documents. During its original review of the applicant's case, the Board found insufficient evidence to support award of the PH based on the applicant's cold weather injury, or that this injury raised to the level of "frostbite", which was required...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001060552C070421
He further claims that one of his fellow soldiers was an eyewitness to seeing seven soldiers killed and the applicant and others being wounded during their encounter with the Korean enemy. The applicant’s siblings provided a signed notarized letter in which they all attest to their brother serving in the US Army in Korea, and being wounded in the forehead, in 1954. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1990-1993 | 9008792
The applicant requests reconsideration of his previous application for award of the Purple Heart for a cold weather injury sustained in Europe in February 1945. The Memorandum of Consideration (MOC) for the original review shows that the denial of the Purple Heart was based upon partially reconstructed military and medical records which prompted the conclusion that the applicant’s condition was more consistent with trench foot rather than with frostbite. Nevertheless, the applicant...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090003995
However, there are no medical records available for the Board's review. The requirement for award of the Purple Heart is that a Soldier must have received medical treatment by medical personnel of the U.S. Armed Forces and that the injury or wound must be documented in medical records. There is no evidence among the available documents and the applicant provides no evidence that shows he held a grade above that of private first class or that his promotion was withheld by anyone within his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080010397
Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests, in effect, that he be awarded the Purple Heart. However, there is no evidence, and the applicant has provided no evidence, to support his allegations.