RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:         25 July 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060009703


      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.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Mr. Joseph A. Adriance            |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Allen L. Raub                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. LaVerne M. Douglas            |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Peguine M. Taylor             |     |Member               |

      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 request to be
awarded the Purple Heart (PH).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he is requesting reconsideration
of his request for the PH and is attaching a letter from his unit commander
that supports his claim.

3.  The applicant provides a third-party letter in support of his
application.

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
AR20040006462, on 28 June 2005.

2.  During the original review of the case, the Board found insufficient
evidence to to support his claim of entitlement to the PH.  The applicant
now submits a
third-party statement from an individual who indicates he was the
applicant's company commander in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) as new
evidence.

3.  This individual submitting the third-party statement states that he met
the applicant at a reunion, and he was informed of the matter.  He claims
to have been the applicant's unit commander in the RVN, from 8 January
through
30 June 1967.  He further indicates that on 7 May 1967, the applicant was
riding in a vehicle on a resupply run, and according to his recollection of
the incident, the vehicle the applicant was riding in received several
rounds of small arms fire from one or two Viet Cong.  The driver of the
vehicle lost control and the vehicle overturned.  He states that the
applicant two other men were injured.  He claims that his first sergeant
normally took care of the administration of putting individuals in for
awards with his approval; however, it appears that in this case, they both
overlooked the applicant's PH.

4.  The applicant's Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows he
served in the RVN from 15 July 1966 through 7 July 1967.  Item 40 (Wounds)
is blank, and the PH is not included in Item 41 (Awards and Decorations).
The applicant last audited his DA Form 20 on 8 July 1967.

5.  The applicant's Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) contains no
orders, or other documents that indicate he was ever wounded in action, or
that he was ever recommended for, or awarded the PH by proper authority
during his tenure on active duty.

6.  The applicant's MPRJ does contain a medical treatment record (SF 509)
that shows that on 5 May 1967, he was treated for a shoulder injury he
received as a result of a jeep accident.  This document gives no indication
that the jeep accident was the result of, or caused by enemy action.

7.  The separation document (DD Form 214) issued to the applicant upon his
separation from active duty on 13 July 1967, does not include the PH in the
list of authorized awards contained in Item 24 (Decorations, Medals,
Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or
Authorized).  The applicant authenticated this document with his signature
in Item 32 (Signature of Person Being Transferred or Discharged) on the
date of his separation.

8.  During the processing of this case, a member of the Board staff
reviewed the Department of the Army (DA) Vietnam Casualty Roster.  The
applicant's name was not included on this casualty list.

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy and
criteria concerning individual military awards.  Paragraph 2-8 contains the
regulatory guidance pertaining to awarding the PH.  It states, in pertinent
part, that the PH is awarded to any member who has been wounded or killed
in action.

10.  The awards regulation defines a wound as an injury to any part of the
body from an outside force or agent sustained under conditions defined by
this 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 was
received as a direct result of, or was caused by enemy action, the wound
required treatment by a medical officer.  This treatment must be supported
by records of medical treatment for the wound or injury received in action,
and must have been made a matter of official record.

11.  Paragraph 2-8b(5) of the awards regulation provides examples of
injuries or wounds that clearly do not qualify for award of the PH.
Included in these examples are accidents, to include explosive, aircraft,
vehicular, and other accidental wounding not related to or caused by enemy
action.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's reconsideration request and the supporting third-party
statement he provided were carefully considered.  However, by regulation in
order to support award of the PH there must be evidence confirming that the
wound for which the award is being made was received as a result of enemy
action.

2.  The evidence of record shows the applicant was treated for a shoulder
injury he received in the RVN as a result of a jeep accident on 5 May 1967.
 However, the medical treatment record for this injury does not indicate
the accident was caused by enemy action.  Further, 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.  The applicant audited the
DA Form 20 on 8 July 1967, upon his departure from the RVN.  This audit, in
effect, was his verification that the information contained on the record,
to include the Item 40 and Item 41 entries, was correct at that time.

3.  The applicant's DD Form 214 does not include the PH in the list of
authorized awards contained in Item 24.  The applicant authenticated this
document with his signature on the date of his separation, 13 July 1967.
In effect, his signature was his verification that the information
contained on the DD Form 214, to include the list of awards contained in
Item 24, was correct at the time the separation document was prepared and
issued.  Finally, the applicant's name is not included on the Vietnam
Casualty Roster, the official DA list of RVN battle casualties.

4.  The veracity of the applicant's claim of entitlement to the PH, and of
the information contained in the third-party statement provided is not in
question. However, absent any evidence of record corroborating this
information, or that confirms the applicant was wounded as a result of
enemy action, the regulatory burden of proof necessary to support award of
the PH has still not been satisfied in this case.  As a result, it would
not serve the interest of all those who served in the RVN and who faced
similar circumstances to grant the requested relief at this late date.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___ALR _  __LMD   _  ___PMT _  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 AR20040006462, dated 28 June 2005.




                                  _____Allen L. Raub     ____
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060009703                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |2005/06/28  AR20040006462               |
|DATE BOARDED            |2006/07/25                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1967/07/13                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |ETS                                     |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.  61   |107.0015                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]