APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That he be awarded the Purple Heart.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he received shrapnel wounds in an ambush around Pleiku, Vietnam in late 1967.  His unit was providing security escort from Pleiku to other field locations.  He was treated at an artillery unit medical aid station but does not remember which one.  He did not seek additional medical care immediately because he was returned to duty so his unit could cover another convoy.  By time he returned to his own unit, the wound had scabbed over so he did not go to his local dispensary.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant’s military records show:

He was born on 15 April 1947.  He was inducted into the Army on 10 August 1966.  He served in Vietnam, from 1 May 1967 - 14 May 1968, as a heavy truck driver.  He was awarded the Vietnam Service Medal and Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal.

Army Regulation 672-5-l, then in effect, provided policy, criteria and administrative instructions concerning individual military decorations.  In pertinent part, it stated that a wound for which the award of the Purple Heart was made must have required treatment by a medical officer and records of medical treatment for wounds or injuries received in action must have been made a matter of official record.

The applicant’s medical records are not available.  The applicant includes a medical record sheet wherein he was treated on 20 August 1993 for an unrelated condition that includes the notation that he has a shrapnel wound scar on his left arm; however, this does not verify treatment at the time of injury.  

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  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 the aforementioned requirement.

2.  Credible statements from witnesses, to show that he was wounded and received treatment from medical personnel at the artillery unit for those wounds at the time, would be an aid in proving his contention but are not provided.
3.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant’s request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

                       GRANT          

                       GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                       DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director