RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  30 October 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070011115 


	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.


Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano

Director

Mr. Michael J. Fowler

Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:


Ms. Carmen Duncan

Chairperson

Mr. Chester Damian

Member

Mr. Ronald Gant

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 reconsideration of an earlier appeal that his records show award of the Purple Heart. 

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he sustained injuries on three different occasions while serving in Vietnam that warrant the award of the Purple Heart.  The medical documents, a letter from a fellow Soldier, and the photographs he provides will prove he was on a gun truck and was not a heavy vehicle operator.  He argues it is a well known fact that record keeping in Vietnam was poorly done and it is not fair for him to suffer because his command did not do its job of record keeping.

3.  The applicant argues that he went through the same issues with the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) just to prove he was injured in Vietnam and that he was a gunner on a truck, not a driver.  They found evidence that he was a gunner and gave him 10 percent disability rating for his right ankle for service connection.  He continues that at the time of his separation he was told by his First Sergeant he would receive the Purple Heart.  He cannot answer as to why the medical officer did not state that he was injured on the gun truck. 

4.  The applicant provides two photographs; a statement from a fellow Soldier, dated 10 March 2004; a 1-page DVA Rating Decision, with an effective date of   5 December 1996; and a medical treatment document, with treatment dates from 24 April 1970 to 11 September 1970.

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 AR20060012005, on 6 March 2007.

2.  The applicant's contentions are new arguments which will be considered by the Board.  In addition, all the evidence provided is new evidence which will be considered by the Board. 

3.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 8 September 1969 and successfully completed basic combat training and advanced individual training.  He was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 64A (Light Vehicle Driver).

4.  The applicant arrived in Vietnam and was assigned to the 88th Transportation Company on or about 5 February 1970.  

5.  The applicant provided a medical treatment document, with treatment dates from 24 April 1970 to 11 September 1970.  This document shows that he was treated for an eye injury on 24 April 1970 and that he was treated for an ankle injury on 21 August 1970.  Neither entry shows that he was treated for wounds as a result of hostile action in Vietnam 

6.  Item 38 (Record of Assignment) on the applicant's DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows that his principal duty with the 88th Transportation Company was heavy vehicle driver.  Item 40 (Wounds) is blank and item 
41 (Awards and Decorations) does not show award of the Purple Heart.

7.  The applicant departed Vietnam on or about 19 March 1971.  On 19 April 1971, he was honorably released from active duty and transferred to the United States Army Reserve Control Group.

8.  The applicant's DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) with the period ending 19 April 1971 covers his service in Vietnam.  Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaigns Ribbons or Authorized) does not show award of the Purple Heart.  

9.  There are no general orders in the applicant’s service personnel records that show he was awarded the Purple Heart.  There also is no evidence in his service personnel records that shows that he was treated for wounds as a result of hostile action in Vietnam.  The applicant's name is not listed on the Vietnam Casualty Roster.  

10.  The applicant submitted a DVA Rating Decision, with an effective date of     5 December 1996, that shows he was awarded a 10 percent rating for a right ankle injury.  The DVA Rating Decision does not indicate how the injury was incurred.

11.  The applicant provided two photographs, one that shows him inside of a truck behind a machine gun and the second photograph shows two machine guns mounted on a truck with the name engraved on the front side "GUNNER CHISUM Oklahoma."


12.  The applicant submitted a statement from a former fellow Soldier on his behalf to the DVA, dated 10 March 2004.  The author stated, in effect, that he 
and the applicant were assigned to the same unit and the applicant served as a 
truck gunner while serving in Vietnam.  The author further stated that on one occasion the applicant was hit and injured by rocket fire and another time the applicant fractured his right ankle.  

13.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides 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, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  There are no orders in the applicant's service personnel records that show he was awarded the Purple Heart.  The statement submitted by a former fellow Soldier confirms the applicant being injured on two occasions.  Unfortunately, the former fellow Soldier did not mention that he was present at the time of the actual incidents or that the applicant was treated for his wounds.  It also does not indicate how the applicant fractured his ankle.

2.  The medical documents provided by the applicant shows he was treated for an eye and ankle injury.  The document does not show that those injuries were incurred as a result of hostile action.  It also does not show that he was treated for the rocket fire injury mentioned by his former fellow Soldier.

3.  In the absence of military records or other corroborating evidence which show the applicant was injured as a result of hostile action and treated for his wounds, there is an insufficient basis for award of the Purple Heart in this case.

4.  The applicant provided two photographs that show he was a gunner on a truck while serving in Vietnam.  

5.  The applicant may very well have been a gunner on a gun truck while serving with the 88th Transportation Company.  However, that would not necessarily be inconsistent with the DA Form 20 entry that showed his principal duty with the 88th Transportation Company as heavy vehicle driver.  


BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

_CD ____  __RG___  __CD ___  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 AR20060012005, dated 6 March 2007.




_____Carmen Duncan___
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20070011115
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
20071030
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
HD
DATE OF DISCHARGE
YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR . . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
MS. MITRANO
ISSUES         1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.