IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  21 September 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100010087 


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 reconsideration of his earlier request for award of the Purple Heart.

2.  The applicant states he was diagnosed with diabetes due to exposure to Agent Orange in Vietnam.  He requests award of the Purple Heart because he suffered minor injuries caused by a booby trap in the jungle during the Tet Offensive.  Things were different back then.  The Army did not have the Wounded Warrior Program and paperwork was not a priority.  A field medic patched him up and sent him on his way.  He did not know he should have reported this injury to a medical clinic upon his return from the field.  It was only after two months of recurring pain in his left arm that he reported to sick call where they found an abscess from an infection which he developed from the wound he received.

3.  The applicant provides the following documents:

* Standard Form 600 (Chronological Record of Medical Care), dated 
25-28 May 1968
* a statement from his current doctor, dated 22 January 2010

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 AR20090011902 on 3 December 2009.

2.  The applicant submitted a Standard Form 600 and a medical statement from his doctor, which were not previously reviewed by the ABCMR.  Therefore, they are considered new evidence and as such warrant consideration by the Board.

3.  The applicant is a retired sergeant first class (SFC)/E-7 who initially enlisted in the Regular Army on 4 August 1966.  He held military occupational specialty 71L (Administrative Specialist) and served in various staff and leadership positions through multiple reenlistments, within and outside the continental United States.

4.  He was honorably retired on 31 July 1990 and placed on the retired list in his retired rank/grade of SFC/E-7 on 1 August 1990.  He was credited with nearly 24 years of creditable active service.

5.  His records further show he served in the Republic of Vietnam from on or about 9 September 1967 to on or about 12 June 1968 as follows:

* from on or about 11 September 1967 to on or about 1 February 1968, he was assigned to the 765th Transportation Battalion
* from on or about 1 February to on or about 10 March 1968, he was assigned to the 611th Transportation Company
* from on or about 10 March to on or about 1 April 1968, he was assigned to the 108th Artillery Group
* from on or about 1 April 1968 to on or about 12 June 1968, he was assigned to the 204th Military Intelligence Detachment

6.  Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) for the period 4 August 1966 through 30 October 1968 does not show award of the Purple Heart.  Additionally, his retirement DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) for the period ending 31 July 1990 does not show award of the Purple Heart.

7.  Item 40 (Wounds) of his contemporaneous DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record), last audited by the applicant on 6 June 1974, is blank.  Additionally, item 9 (Awards, Decorations, and Campaigns) of a subsequent DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) does not show award of the Purple Heart.

8.  His name is not shown on the Vietnam casualty roster.

9.  There are no general orders in his records that show he was awarded the Purple Heart.

10.  A review of the Awards and Decorations Computer-Assisted Retrieval System, an index of general orders issued during the Vietnam era between 1965 and 1973 maintained by the Military Awards Branch of the United States Army Human Resources Command, failed to reveal any orders for the Purple Heart pertaining to the applicant.

11.  His medical records are available for review with this case but none of the medical documents show he was wounded in action or treated for a combat wound.

12.  None of his multiple evaluation reports, award citations, letters of recommendation, favorable waivers for reenlistment and allied documents, and multiple other documents in his service personnel record address or refer to a combat wound.

13.  He submitted the following documents:

	a.  A Standard Form 600, dated on various dates in May 1968, which shows his arm was checked or treated for an abscess.  However, there is no indication this was caused by enemy action.

	b.  A statement, dated 22 January 2010, from his doctor wherein he states that the applicant is his patient and that the applicant had told him he was exposed to Agent Orange in Vietnam.

14.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides that the Purple Heart is awarded for a wound sustained while in action against an enemy or 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.  A wound is defined as an injury to any part of the body from an outside force or agent sustained under one or more of the conditions applicable to the Purple Heart.  Examples of injuries or wounds which clearly do not justify award of the Purple Heart are chemical, biological, or nuclear agents not released by the enemy.  A physical lesion is not required; however, the wound for which the award is made must have required treatment by medical personnel and records of medical treatment for wounds or injuries received in action must have been made a matter of official record.


DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Purple Heart differs from all other decorations in that an individual is not "recommended" for the decoration; rather he or she is entitled to it upon meeting specific criteria.  When contemplating an award of this decoration, the key issue that commanders must take into consideration is the degree to which the enemy caused the injury.

2.  In this case, the applicant's service in Vietnam is not in question.  However, his name is not shown on the Vietnam casualty roster; his DA Form 20 does not document any combat wounds; and there is no evidence in his service personnel records that shows he was wounded or injured as a result of hostile action by an enemy-placed booby trap, or otherwise, or treated for such wounds.

3.  The criteria for an award of the Purple Heart requires the submission of substantiating evidence to verify that the wound was the result of hostile action, the wound must have required treatment by medical personnel, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.

4.  The governing regulation states that chemical, biological, or nuclear agents not released by enemy agents are examples of injuries or wounds which clearly do not qualify for award of the Purple Heart.  Since Agent Orange was employed by U.S. Forces in Vietnam as a chemical defoliant and not by the enemy, its use cannot be construed as a hostile action on the part of the enemy and exposure to Agent Orange cannot be the basis for award of the Purple Heart.

5.  Notwithstanding the applicant's sincerity, in the absence of additional documentation that conclusively shows he was wounded or injured as a result of hostile action and treated for those wounds, there is insufficient evidence upon which to base award of the Purple Heart 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 AR20090011902, dated 3 December 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)                                         AR20100010087



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100010087



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1