| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Joseph A. Adriance | Analyst |
| Ms. June Hajjar | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Karol A. Kennedy | Member | |
| Mr. Roger Able | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that he be awarded the Purple Heart (PH).
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was never awarded the PH for wounds he received in action in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) on 8 April 1969. In support of his application, he provides a copy of an unsigned, undated, Disposition Form (DF) (DA Form 2496), which contained the following subject: “Award of the Combat Infantryman’s Badge”.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He entered active duty on 1 September 1967 and continuously served for
3 years, 1 month, and 16 days, until being honorably separated on 24 October 1970.
The applicant’s Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) confirms that he was assigned to the Special Operations Augmentation, 5th Special Forces Group,
1st Special Forces, RVN, and served as radio teletype operator from 8 March 1969 through 21 October 1970. Item 40 (Wounds) of his DA Form 20 contains no entry and the PH is not included in the list of earned awards contained in item
41 (Awards and Decorations) of this record.
There is a Report of Medical Examination (SF 88), dated 24 October 1970, on file that confirms the applicant underwent a separation medical examination on that date. This document makes no reference to the applicant being wounded in action or to any medical treatment related to his being wounded or injured in action. The applicant made the following comments in item 73 (Notes) of this form: “Since my last physical my condition has not changed”; “I have reviewed my medical records”; and “My condition is good.” The physician that conducted the examination entered no comments in Item 74 (Summary of Defects) and he medically cleared the applicant for separation.
The separation document (DD Form 214) issued to and authenticated by the applicant with his signature on 24 October 1970, the date of his release from active duty (REFRAD), confirms that he held the rank of sergeant/E-5 (SGT/E-5) and served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 05C4P during his tenure on active duty. This document also lists the awards earned by the applicant during his active duty tenure; however, this list of awards does not include the PH. The applicant signed this separation document in item 32 (Signature of Person being Transferred or Discharged), thereby verifying the data contained therein, and there is no indication that he raised the PH as an issue during his separation processing.
The applicant provides a copy of a DF in support of his application. This
DF contained the following subject: “Award of the Combat Infantryman’s Badge” and it contained an entry that indicated that he had been wounded in action. However, this document was unsigned, undated, and it provided no facts and circumstances supporting the entry indicating that he had been wounded in action. It also gave no indication of what official record verification was to confirm he was wounded in action and that he was treated for that wound by military medical personnel.
Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning individual military awards. Paragraph
2-8 contains the regulatory guidance pertaining to awarding the PH. It states, in pertinent part, that in order to support the award of the PH, it is necessary to establish that the wound, for which the award is being made, required treatment by a medical officer, this treatment must be supported by records of the medical treatment for the wound or injury received in action, and this 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 Board notes the applicant’s contention that he is entitled to be awarded the PH based on his having been wounded in action in the RVN. However, it finds insufficient evidence to support this claim.
2. By regulation, in order to receive the PH, a member must have been wounded in action, the wound must have required treatment by a medical officer, and this treatment must have made a matter of official record. The evidence of record is void of any indication that the applicant was ever wounded in action, treated for a wound received in action by military medical personnel, or that the treatment for a wound received in action was made a matter of official record.
3. Further, the DF provided by the applicant, while containing an entry that indicates he was wounded in action, was unsigned, undated, and there was no indication that this document was properly prepared, processed, or approved by the proper authority. While the Board acknowledges and wishes to congratulate the applicant on his exemplary record of combat service, it concludes that the regulatory burden of proof necessary to award the PH has not been met in this case. Therefore, the Board is compelled to deny the requested relief.
4. 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
5. 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
___JH___ __KAK__ __RA____ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001064053 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/02/05 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | HD |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | 1970/10/24 |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR 635-200 |
| DISCHARGE REASON | ETS |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 61 | 107.0015 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060015238
During its original review of the applicant's request for the PH, the Board found no evidence of record to show that the applicant was wounded or injured as a result of enemy action or that he was ever recommended for or awarded the PH by proper authority while serving on active duty. The applicant's record is void of any orders, or other documents that indicate he was ever wounded in action, or that show he was ever recommended for or awarded the PH by proper authority while serving on...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100023129
These orders awarded the applicant the PH for being wounded in action in the RVN on 23 May 1970. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides the Army's awards policy. Item 40 of his DA Form 20 contains an entry showing the applicant was wounded in action in the RVN on 23 May 1970, and the record confirms he was medically evacuated to the United States on 28 May 1970.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004103C070206
The applicant provides award recommendations for the awards in question from senior medic who served with him in the RVN. In this case, the evidence of record includes no indication that the applicant was ever wounded/injured in action, or that he was ever treated for a combat related wound/injury. The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief and to excuse failure to timely file.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067839C070402
By regulation, in order to support awarding a member the PH, it is necessary to establish that the wound, for which the award is being made, required treatment by a medical officer. Therefore, the Board concludes it would be appropriate to award him the PH at this time. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by awarding the individual concerned the Purple Heart for being wounded in action, while serving as a SGT/E-5 in the RVN, on 18 February 1970;...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060017380C071029
The applicant states, in effect, the list of awards contained on his separation document (DD Form 214) does not include the PH. Item 40 of the applicant's DA Form 20 is blank, which indicates he was never wounded in action, and Item 41 does not include the PH in the list of authorized awards entered. Therefore, the time for him to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 7 May 1973.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040004920C070208
Antonio Uribe | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant’s Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) confirms that he served in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) from 5 December 1969 through 27 August 1970. Notwithstanding the entry in Item 40 his DA Form 20, there are no orders or documents on file in his MPRJ that indicate the applicant was ever recommended for, or awarded the PH by proper authority.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090019387
The applicant's record is void of medical treatment records showing he was wounded in action or treated for a combat-related wound while serving in the RVN. It states 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. However, by regulation, in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000719C070206
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 30 August 2005 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20050000719 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 applicant’s Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows he served in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) from 29 January 1970 through 16 December 1970, and that during his RVN tour, he was assigned to Company D, 1st...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004106655C070208
LaVerne M. Douglas | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The evidence of record in this case includes an entry in Item 40 of the applicant’s DA Form 20 that shows he received a fragmentation wound to the neck on 15 November 1969, while serving in the RVN. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by awarding him the Purple Heart, for being...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002070667C070402
The Board notes the applicant contention that he was wounded in action in the RVN and is entitled to the PH. By regulation, in order to support an award of the PH, it is necessary to establish that a member was wounded in action and that the wound, for which the award is being made, required treatment by a medical officer. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by awarding the individual concerned the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal for...