PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            8 February 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000047585

	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.  

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. JoAnn H. Langston		Chairperson	
	Mr. George D. Paxson		Member	
	Mr. Donald P. Hupman, Jr.		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
            records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests, in effect, that he be awarded the Purple Heart and any other awards he is authorized to receive. 

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that he received shrapnel wounds to the lower extremities while assisting a wounded soldier during an explosion in 1969 at a landing zone in Chu Lai, Vietnam.  He further states that he was treated and released the same day but no information regarding the treatment was entered in his records.  He also states that at the time he got out he was very young and was in a hurry to come home.  Furthermore, he had no interest in medals at the time but as he has aged, he feels differently and desires to join the Military Order of the Purple Heart.  In support of his application he submits a copy of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) decision and a copy of a picture of himself pointing to his wound. 

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he was inducted at 20 years of age on 20 November 1968 in San Antonio, Texas.  He successfully completed his training and was transferred to Vietnam on 7 May 1969.  He was assigned to duty as a field artillery cannoneer with B Battery, 1st Battalion 82d Artillery, Americal Division.

5.  He continued to serve until he was returned from Vietnam and was honorably released from active duty on 22 June 1970, as an early-out to attend college.  He had served 1 year, 7 months and 3 days of total active service.  His report of separation (DD Form 214) shows that he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal, and the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal.

6.  The applicant’s records also contain a transmittal letter dated 4 May 1971 containing an Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) awarded to the applicant by the Americal Division in General Order #5126 on 29 May 1970.  There is no indication that the award was ever entered on his DD Form 214.

7.  A review of the available records failed to show any indication that the applicant had been wounded/injured as a result of enemy action or treated for any such wounds.

8.  The picture submitted with his application is a photocopy of a photograph showing an individual pointing to his right leg.  There are handwritten annotations indicating that in May or June 1969 he was wounded by flying metal shrapnel when one of his own guns exploded.

9.  The VA Rating Decision provided by the applicant with his application indicates that the VA reviewed the applicant’s claim for shrapnel wounds to the lower right extremity and reviewed the photo he submitted to this Board as well as the scars.  The VA opined that while there was no evidence in his medical records to substantiate his claim, any reasonable doubt should be resolved in favor of the applicant.  The VA established service connection for scars from shrapnel wounds to the right lower extremity and assigned a non-compensable rating.

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that the Purple Heart is awarded for a wound sustained as a result of hostile action.  Substantiating evidence must be provided to verify that the wound was a result of hostile action, that the wound must have required treatment by a medical officer, and that the medical treatment was made a matter of official record.

11.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 establishes the eligibility for unit awards.  It provides in pertinent part, that the 1st Battalion, 82 Artillery was awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with palm (RVNGC w/palm) for the periods of 24 August to 31 December 1969 and 31 March to 30 June 1970.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Notwithstanding the determination of the VA, the evidence of record fails to clearly show that the applicant was wounded/injured as a result of enemy action or that his wounds/injuries were treated by medical personnel and made a matter of official record.

2.  The fact that the VA, in its discretion, has awarded the applicant a non-compensable disability rating for shrapnel wounds, such an award is a prerogative exercised within the policies of that agency.  It does not, in itself, establish that he was wounded as a result of enemy action or entitle him to the award of the Purple Heart.

3.  The evidence provided by the applicant indicates that his wound/injury was more related to an accident involving US Forces weapons exploding than as a result of enemy action.  Therefore, there appears to be no basis to award him a Purple Heart.

4.  However, the evidence of record does show that he was awarded an ARCOM that was not recorded in his records at the time of separation.  Accordingly, it would be appropriate to do so at this time.

5.  Additionally, the evidence of record shows that his unit was subsequently awarded the RVNGC w/palm.  Therefore, it would be in the interest of justice to award it to him at this time and to correct his records accordingly.

6.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by awarding the individual concerned the RVNGC w/palm and by showing that he was awarded the ARCOM.

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

__dh____  ___jhl___  ___gp___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		___JoAnn H. Langston____
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000047585	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2001/02/08	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT PARTIAL	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  140	107.0094	
2.  61	107.0015	
3.  66	107.0020	
4.		
5.		
6.