APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That he be awarded the Bronze Star Medal (BSM) with “V” device and the Purple Heart.  He includes with his request a copy of a June 1993 medical consultation as proof of his shrapnel wound.

APPLICANT STATES:  That while on active duty in Vietnam in June 1970 he was involved in operations in Cambodia where he was wounded by shrapnel but never awarded the Purple Heart. He asserts also that he was recommended for the BSM but never received that award either.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

He was inducted on 10 January 1969 and served in Vietnam from 15 September 1969 to 14 September 1970.  After a break in service he reenlisted and through a series of immediate reenlistments remained on active duty until his retirement as a staff sergeant on 31 August 1993 with over 20 years of service.

His awards include the Army Commendation Medal, the Army Achievement Medal, the Good Conduct Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal, the Vietnam Campaign Medal, the Humanitarian Service Medal, the NCO Professional Development Ribbon, the Army Service Ribbon, the Overseas Service Ribbon, the Vietnam Gallantry Cross, the National Defense Service Medal, the Driver and Mechanic Badge with driver bar, and the Expert Badge with rifle bar.

The available records contain no information, other than the documentation he provided, that he was wounded as a result of combat action.  Nor is there any indication of a recommendation having been submitted for award of the BSM or BSM with “V” device.

On 18 June 1993 the applicant was referred to the eye, nose and throat clinic for consultation of persistant face pain. The examining physician found a small metal fragment on the right oribital rim.  The physician stated that it was presumed that the metal fragment was a shrapnel injury from Vietnam and that the patient appeared eligible for the Purple Heart.

Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that the primary requirement for award of a decoration is that a formal recommendation be prepared and introduced into official military channels within 2 years of the act, achievement, or service to be recognized.  The sole exception to the 2-year time limit occurs when there is conclusive evidence that a formal recommendation was submitted but was lost, or through inadvertence was never acted on by proper authority.

The same regulation provides the following guidance pertaining to the award of the BSM.  The BSM is awarded to any person who, while serving in any capacity in or with the US Army after 6 December 1941, distinguished himself by heroic or meritorious achievement or service, not involving participation in aerial flight, in connection with military operations against an armed enemy; or while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party.

The same regulation also 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:  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.  After examining the military records, no evidence was found that he was awarded the BSM or BSM with “V” device.  Further, the records contain no documentation to indicate that such a recommendation was submitted but was lost or had failed to be acted upon by proper authority.

2.  The medical consultation dated 18 June 1993 in which the physician states that “a small metal fragment on the right intraoribital rim” is a...“presumed shrapnel injury in Vietnam...” was made more than 23 years after his assignment in Vietnam, and was based upon information provided by the applicant rather than an independent confirmation by the examining physician.  Moreover, the record does not show that the injury was combat related which is a necessary finding in order to qualify for award of the Purple Heart.

3.  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

                       DENY APPLICATION




						Karl F. Schneider
						Acting Director