MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           27 JUNE 2002                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002071468

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Kenneth H. Aucock		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright		Chairperson	
	Ms. Kathleen A. Newman		Member	
	Mr. Richard T. Dunbar		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

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

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  Award of the Purple Heart.  

APPLICANT STATES:  That his in-service gunshot wound be recognized with the award of the Purple Heart.

The applicant provides a statement from a person who served with him in Vietnam.  That individual stated that he was the driver of a gun truck and the applicant was the gunner, and that while on a convoy they were ambushed and stopped to return fire.  While under fire the applicant’s .50 caliber machine gun blew up on him causing powder burns and shrapnel [wounds] to his face and chest area.  He stated that he believes the action to have been around August 1971.  He also stated that on a later convoy, they again were ambushed, and while reaching for ammunition, the applicant’s .50 caliber machine gun started to swing in front of another gunner’s machine gun.  The applicant grabbed the barrel of the gun to stop it, badly burning his hand.

The applicant provides pages from a VA rating decision, which indicates that the VA accepted the “buddy” statement as sufficient evidence to establish that a verified inservice stressor occurred.  That decision also indicates that the VA determined that service connection for a residual scar for a shell fragment wound to the applicant’s abdomen was directly related to his military service.  It indicated that a VA examination did show that the applicant burned the palmar surface of his right hand when he grabbed onto a hot machine gun barrel superficially burning the palmar surface of his right hand. 

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

The applicant enlisted in the Army for three years on 29 January 1971, completed training, and in July 1971 was assigned to the 597th Transportation Company in Vietnam as a truck driver.  The applicant participated in three campaigns during his tour in Vietnam – Consolidation I, Consolidation II, and Vietnam Cease-Fire.  The unit to which he was assigned was awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm.  

The applicant returned to the United States in April 1972 and began a series of AWOLs.  

An 8 August 1972 report of medical examination shows that the applicant physically qualified for separation with a physical profile serial of 1 1 1 1 1 1.  That report makes no mention of wounds incurred by the applicant.  In the report of medical history that he furnished for the examination, the applicant stated that he was in good health.  He made no mention of any wounds, burns, or other injuries that he suffered.  He indicated that he had never been a patient in any type of hospital, and that he had never consulted or been treated by clinics, physicians, healers, or other practitioners within the past 5 years, other than minor illnesses. 

On 10 November 1972 he requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial.  His request was approved by the separation authority.  The applicant was discharged on 21 December 1972.  He had 1 year, 8 months, and 14 days of service, and 68 days of lost time.  His DD Form 214 does not show award of the Purple Heart.  His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) does not show award of the Purple Heart, and does not show that he sustained any wounds.

The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows award of the Vietnam Service Medal but does not reflect that he participated in three campaigns by indicating award of three bronze service stars with that medal.  That form also does not show award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm.

Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides 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, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.

Information from the Total Army Personnel Command Awards Branch indicated that there was no record of the applicant having received an award of the Purple Heart, nor any record that he was listed as a casualty on the Vietnam casualty roster maintained by that agency.

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.  Notwithstanding the applicant’s statement, the information provided by a former comrade, and the information contained in the pages of a VA rating decision, there is no evidence that the applicant was wounded as a result of hostile action.  There is no evidence that he was treated for a wound, and no record of treatment.  There is insufficient evidence to grant the applicant’s request.

2.  The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of his request.   

3.  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 that requirement.
4.  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.

NOTE:  The ARBA Support Division in St. Louis is requested to correct the applicant’s records to show award of the Vietnam Service Medal with three bronze service stars and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm. 

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__INW __  __KAN __  __RTD __  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002071468	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20020627	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107.00	
2.	61	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.