IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  7 April 2009

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090001240 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (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 his record contains no documentation to show he ever received the PH.  He also states that his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) fails to show the Veterans Administration (VA) granted him service-connection for residuals of superficial shrapnel and burn wounds on his back that he sustained in combat.

3.  The applicant provides a VA Form 21-6796 (Rating Decision) 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 AC85-06068, on 6 April 1988.

2.  The applicant provides a VA Form 21-6796 as new evidence which was not previously considered by the Board.  Therefore, it would be appropriate to reconsider the applicant's request for the Purple Heart at this time.


3.  During its initial review of the case, the Board determined there was insufficient evidence to confirm the applicant sustained a fragment wound to his back as a result of enemy action or otherwise.  The medical records provided confirmation that the applicant reported to a medical clinic on 11 August 1969, seeking medical attention for fragment wounds to his back.  However, it was determined that no fragment wounds were present.

4.  The applicant's record shows that he was inducted into the Army of the United States and entered active duty on 29 September 1967.  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman), and specialist four (SP4)/E-4 is the highest rank/grade he attained while serving on active duty. 

5.  The applicant's DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows he served in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) from 6 October 1968 through 21 September 1969.  Item 40 (Wounds) is blank and the PH is not included in the list of awards contained in Item 41 (Awards and Decorations).  

6.  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 while serving on active duty.  The record also does not include medical treatment records that indicate he was ever treated for a combat-related wound or injury while serving in the RVN. 

7.  On 17 September 1969, the applicant was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD) after completing a total of 1 year, 11 months, and 19 days of active military service.  The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time shows he earned the following awards:  National Defense Service Medal, Vietnam Service Medal, RVN Campaign Medal, and the Combat Infantryman’s Badge.  The PH is not included in the list of awards contained on the separation document.

8.  The applicant's Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) contains a DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214), dated 26 May 1988.  This document was prepared as a result of the ABCMR’s original case and it shows that the Bronze Star Medal with first oak leaf cluster, Air Medal, and the Army Commendation Medal were added to the applicant’s DD Form 214.

9.  During the processing of this case, a member of the Board staff reviewed the Department of the Army (DA) Vietnam Casualty Roster.  There was no entry pertaining to the applicant on this list of RVN casualties.



10.  The applicant provides a VA Form 21-6796, dated 20 January 1984.  It shows that the VA granted the applicant a service-connected disability rating of less than 10 percent for residuals of superficial shrapnel wounds of back and superficial burns of the back received in combat.

11.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes the Army's awards policy.  Paragraph 2-8 contains the regulatory guidance pertaining to award of the PH.  It states, in pertinent part, that 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 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 of his earlier petition to be awarded the PH and the evidence he provided were carefully considered.  However, 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; that the wound required treatment by medical personnel; and a record of this medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record. 

2.  The VA Form 21-6796 provided by the applicant indicates he sustained superficial shrapnel wounds and burns to his back in combat; however, his official Army medical record contains no evidence to show he was ever treated for a combat-related wound or injury to corroborate this information.  In addition, Item 40 of his DA Form 20 is blank and the PH is not included in the list of awards contained in Item 41.  Furthermore, 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.

3.  Finally, the applicant's name is not included on the Vietnam Casualty Roster, the official DA list of RVN battle casualties.  Therefore, absent any evidence of record confirming the applicant was wounded in action or treated for a combat-related wound while serving in the RVN, the regulatory burden of proof necessary to support award of the PH still has not been satisfied in this case.

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 related to award of the PH.   

5.  The applicant and all others concerned should know that this action in no way diminishes the sacrifices made by the applicant in service to our Nation.  The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of his service in arms.  

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 AC85-06068, dated 6 April 1988.



      ________x______________
               CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090001240



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090001240



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1