PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           20 June 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002070472

	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	
	Ms. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. Roger W. Able		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		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 that he be awarded the Purple Heart.

3.  The applicant states that his injuries were taken care of at the field aid station. He was returned to duty after the glass was removed from his eyes and mouth.  He provides his Report of Separation from Active Duty, DD Form 214, for the period ending 25 March 1974, General Orders 1668 awarding him the Air Medal for heroism, and a letter from his co-pilot as supporting evidence.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that, after having had prior service, he entered active duty as an aviator warrant officer on 7 September 1971.  He served in Vietnam from on or about October 1971 to on or about October 1972.

5.  The applicant and Warrant Officer D___ were awarded the Air Medal with “V” device on General Orders 1668, Headquarters, 1st Aviation Brigade dated 7 June 1972 for action on 28 April 1972.  The citation states that their aircraft came under heavy hostile ground to air fire.  The engine was shot out but they were able to autorotate to the ground.

6.  Warrant Officer D___ (now Chief Warrant Officer Four, retired) provided an expanded description of the 28 April 1972 incident.  He states that the applicant was wounded by shrapnel and glass in the face and eyes when enemy bullets struck their helicopter from underneath and destroyed their instrument panel and windscreen.  After they were rescued, the medical officer removed the glass slivers and small metal splinters from the applicant’s eyes.

7.  The applicant was released from active duty on 25 March 1974.  On               2 November 1975, he re-entered active duty as an aviator warrant officer.  On his Report of Medical History, SF 93, dated 17 October 1991 for a flight physical, the applicant noted that he received glass fragments in both eyes in 1972.  Item 25, the physician’s summary, indicated the applicant had a history of corneal abrasion with no sequalae.  He retired on 1 August 1992.

8.  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 the result of hostile action, the wound must have required treatment by a medical officer, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The statements of individuals are normally inadequate as the sole basis for an award of the Purple Heart because they do not fulfill the regulatory requirement that there be a record of medical treatment.  However, in this case, the supporting statement from the applicant’s co-pilot is to some extent supported by evidence of record to substantiate that the applicant did in fact receive the wounds claimed and was treated by competent medical personnel.  The award citation itself indicates the helicopter’s engine was shot out, making further damage to the helicopter, such as a destroyed instrument panel and windscreen, reasonably presumptuous.  Such damage leads to the reasonable presumption that an occupant of the helicopter, in this case the applicant, would have received wounds from flying glass from the shattered windscreen and metal splinters from the destroyed instrument panel.  

2.  Although there is no direct medical evidence to show that the applicant received medical treatment for the claimed wounds, the physician from his October 1991 flight physical indicated that the applicant had a history of corneal abrasion.  This would not be inconsistent with Warrant Officer D___’s description of the applicant’s wounds.  The Board concludes that any reasonable doubt concerning the applicant’s eligibility for award of the Purple Heart should be resolved in his favor.

3.  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 applicant the Purple Heart for wounds received on     28 April 1972.

2.  That the Purple Heart be added to the applicant’s DD Forms 214 for the periods ending 25 March 1974 and 31 July 1992.

BOARD VOTE:  

__RVO__  __RWA__  __JTM__  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

	                                          ___Raymond V. O’Connor___
		     CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002070472	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2002/06/20	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107.0015	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.