Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080001775
Original file (20080001775.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied


RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	


	BOARD DATE:	  6 May 2008
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080001775 


	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.




Director



Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:




Chairperson



Member



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 earlier petition to be awarded the Purple Heart (PH).  

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he disagrees with the original Board decision in his case.  He claims that he was wounded in action in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) in March 1968, and should be awarded the PH.  

3.  The applicant provides a letter to his wife, dated 11 March 1968, in support of his reconsideration request.  

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 AR20070011373, on 20 December 2007.  

2.  During its original review of the case, the Board found no evidence of record to support the applicant's claim that he was wounded in action in the RVN.  The Board noted that there were no PH award orders on file in his record and no personnel service record entries that indicated that the applicant was ever wounded in action or awarded the PH.  It further noted that this name was not included on the Vietnam Casualty Roster.  As a result, it concluded there was no evidence to support award of the PH in this case.  

3.  The applicant provides a letter he wrote to his wife on 11 March 1968, as new evidence.  In the letter he indicates he got something that almost put him in the hospital.  He explained that the only thing that stopped it was a magazine that it went through that caused it to lose all its force, and resulted in his back being barely scratched.  

4.  Item 40 (Wounds) of the applicant's Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) is blank, and the PH is not included in the list of awards contained in Item 41 (Awards and Decorations).  

5.  The applicant's Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) is void of any orders or other documents that indicate the applicant was ever recommended for or awarded the PH by proper authority; and of any medical treatment records that indicate he was ever treated for a wound he received as a result of enemy action.  
6.  On 3 July 1969, the applicant was honorably released from active duty after completing 1 year, 11 months, and 27 days of active military service.  The separation document (DD Form 214) he was issued on the date of his separation did not include the PH in the list of awards contained in Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized), and the applicant authenticated the DD Form214 with his signature in Item 32 (Signature of Person Being Transferred or Discharged) on the date of his separation.    

7.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes the Army's awards policy.  Paragraph 2-8 contains the regulatory guidance pertaining to awarding the PH.  It states, in pertinent part, that in order to award a 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.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's request for reconsideration to be awarded the PH, and the letter to his wife he provided were carefully considered.  However, there still remains an insufficient evidentiary basis to support granting the requested relief. 

2.  By regulation, in order to support award of the PH, there must be evidence that the member was wounded as a result of enemy action; that the wound required treatment by military medical personnel; and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.  

3.  Notwithstanding the letter the applicant wrote to his wife, which indicated he was wounded when he was barely scratched by some object, the evidence of record contains no indication that the he was wounded as a result of enemy action, or that he was ever treated for a combat-related wound by military medical personnel.  

4.  Item 40 of the applicant's DA Form 20 is blank, which indicates he was never wounded in action, and the PH is not included in Item 41.  Further, there are no orders or other documents on file in his OMPF that indicate he was ever recommended for or awarded the PH by proper authority, and there are no medical treatment records on file that indicate he was ever treated for a combat- related wound or injury while serving in the RVN.  

5.  Absent any evidence of record that confirms the applicant was wounded in action or treated for a combat-related wound or injury while serving in the RVN, or that corroborates the information contained in his 1968 letter to his wife, the regulatory burden of proof necessary to support award of the PH still has not been satisfied in this case, and it would not be appropriate or serve the interest of all those who served in the RVN and who faced similar circumstances to support award of the PH at this late date.  

6.  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.  As a result, there is insufficient evidence to support amendment of the original Board decision in this case.  

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___x____  ___x ____  ___x____  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 AR20070011373, dated 20 December 2007.




_______x_______________
          CHAIRPERSON

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080012989

    Original file (20080012989.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant's record is void of any orders or other documents that indicate he was ever recommended for, or awarded the PH by proper authority and/or of medical treatment records showing he was treated for a combat related wound or injury. 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...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060011011C071029

    Original file (20060011011C071029.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    It states, in pertinent part, that the PH is awarded to any member who has been wounded or killed in action. By regulation, 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. The applicant's DA Form 20 contains no entry in Item 40, which indicates the applicant was never wounded in action while serving on active duty, and the PH is not included in the list of authorized awards contained in Item 41.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090002488

    Original file (20090002488.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. During its original review of the applicant's case, the Board found no evidence of record that showed 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. Absent any evidence of record to corroborate the information contained in the third-party statements provided by the applicant, or medical treatment records that confirm...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120000573

    Original file (20120000573.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 the wound required treatment by military medical personnel; and a record of that treatment must have been made a matter of official record. The evidence of record contains no entries or documents that corroborate the applicant's claim that he was wounded as a result of enemy action while serving in the RVN. Therefore, absent...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050017511C070206

    Original file (20050017511C070206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Item 40 (Wounds) is blank and the PH is not included in the list of authorized awards contained in Item 41 (Awards and Decorations). There are no documents on file in the applicant's Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) that show he was ever recommended for, or awarded the PH by proper authority while he was serving on active duty, or that indicate he was ever treated for a combat related wound or injury by military medical personnel. The applicant's DA Form 20 contains a blank entry...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070002161C071029

    Original file (20070002161C071029.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant provides a statement from an individual who indicates he was the MEDIC that treated the applicant's wound. The applicant provides a statement from a former service member who served as a platoon sergeant with the applicant during the battle of Nhi Ha. Absent any evidence of record to corroborate the information contained in the third-party statements provided and/or of any evidence that the applicant was awarded the PH by proper authority while serving on active duty, the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060012855

    Original file (20060012855.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    During its original review of the applicant's case, the Board found no evidence of record that showed 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. By regulation, 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 or was caused by enemy action, that it required treatment by military...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090004616

    Original file (20090004616.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant provides a newspaper article as new evidence in support of his reconsideration request. His DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record), which he last reviewed on 3 March 2001, does not include the PH in the list of awards contained in item 9 (Awards, Decorations, and Campaigns). Absent any evidence of record corroborating his claim that he was wounded in action and/or treated for a combat-related wound while serving in the RVN or that shows he was ever recommended for or...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040010625C070208

    Original file (20040010625C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He further states this was presented to the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) immediately upon his return from the Republic of Vietnam (RVN), and evidence of the wound was made part of his VA medical record, along with radiological studies of other shrapnel remaining in his body. However, absent some evidence of record to corroborate that his wound was received as a direct result of, or was caused by enemy action, or that he was treated for a combat related wound, there is an insufficient...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070002565C071029

    Original file (20070002565C071029.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, by regulation, in order to support award of the PH, there must be evidence confirming the wound for which the award is being made was received as a result of or was caused by enemy action, that the wound required treatment by military medical personnel, and a record of this medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record. Finally, while the veracity of the applicant's claim of entitlement to the PH and of the information contained in the third-party statement and...