BOARD DATE:	  9 September 2009

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090004616 


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, he took shrapnel in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) that resulted in an injury to his left leg.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of a newspaper article in support of his request for reconsideration.

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 AR20080018530 on 18 February 2009.

2.  During its original review, the Board found no evidence in the applicant's record that showed he was ever recommended for the PH or that he was wounded or treated for wounds as result of hostile action.  It finally concluded the regulatory burden of proof necessary to support award of the PH had not been satisfied in the applicant's case.


3.  The applicant provides a newspaper article as new evidence in support of his reconsideration request.  The article indicates that word was received that the applicant was recovering at the 17th Medical Evacuation Hospital in the RVN from shrapnel wounds he received on 13 August.  The source of the information pertaining to the applicant is not identified in the article.

4.  The applicant's record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army and entered active duty on 11 April 1966.  His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows he served in the RVN from 6 January 1967 through 2 January 1968.  Item 38 (Record of Assignments) shows that during his RVN tour, he was assigned to the 44th Infantry Platoon (Scout Dog), 4th Infantry Division, performing duties in military occupational specialty 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman) as a scout observer.  Item 40 (Wounds) is blank and item 41 (Awards and Decorations) shows that he earned the National Defense Service Medal, RVN Campaign Medal (RVNCM), Vietnam Service Medal (VSM), and Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB) during his active duty tenure.  The PH is not included in the list of awards contained in item 41.

5.  On 18 January 1968, the applicant was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD) in the rank of sergeant after completing 1 year, 9 months, and 8 days of active military service.  The DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) he was issued at the time does not include the PH in the list of earned awards entered in item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized).

6.  The applicant's record shows that he served in the Army National Guard and U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) in an enlisted status from 5 May 1979 through 18 July 1980 and was commissioned as a first lieutenant in the USAR on 19 July 1980.  He continued to serve in an active Reserve status through 1 June 2001 at which time he transferred into the Retired Reserve in the rank of major.  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).

7.  The applicant's official military personnel file (OMPF) is void of any documents or orders that indicate the applicant was ever recommended for or awarded the PH.  It is also void of any medical treatment records that indicate he was ever treated for a combat-related wound or injury by military medical personnel.

8.  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 casualty list.

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) contains the Army's awards policy.  Paragraph 2-8 contains guidance on award of the PH and states, in pertinent part, that in order to support award of the PH there must be evidence that 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 treatment must have been made a matter of official record.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that he is eligible for the PH based on being wounded in action in the RVN and the supporting new evidence he submitted was 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 it required treatment by military medical personnel, and a record of this treatment must have been made a matter of official record.

2.  In this case, although the newspaper article provided by the applicant as new evidence indicates he was being treated for a shrapnel wound at the 17th Medical Evacuation Hospital in the RVN, it provides no specific information regarding how the shrapnel wound was incurred and fails to identify the source of the information in the article.  Further, it is not corroborated by any record entries or documents on file in his OMPF.  To the contrary, item 40 of his DA Form 20 covering the period of his enlisted service is blank, which indicates he was never wounded in action, and item 41 does not include the PH in the list of earned awards entered.  In addition, the applicant's name is not included on the Vietnam casualty roster, the official DA list of RVN battle casualties.

3.  Finally, there is no indication that the applicant ever pursued his claim of eligibility for the PH during his military service which extended through March 2001 or at any time prior to his original application to this Board in October 2008, more than 40 years after the fact.

4.  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 awarded the PH by proper authority during his military service tenure, there remains an insufficient evidentiary basis to support award of the PH or to amend the original Board decision in this case.  Therefore, 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.


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 AR20080018530, dated 18 February 2009.



      ___________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)                                         AR20090004616



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090004616



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1