MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF. 

	BOARD DATE:            24 June 2003    
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003086505

	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. Joseph A. Adriance		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Ronald E. Blakely		Member	
	Mr. Frank C. Jones, II 		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:  In effect, that he be awarded the Purple Heart (PH). 

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was seriously injured while serving in combat in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN).  He claims that while on an operation his group came under enemy fire.  The group headed in the direction of the fire when the tank he was in struck a land mine and was destroyed.  He claims that he was knocked unconscious and remained that way for several hours.  He states that he received treatment for this injury in the field, and was later taken back to the base.  He claims that he had contusions on the top of his head, and he bled extensively from his mouth and nose as a result of the concussion.  He also states that he is providing a copy of the morning report listing him as a casualty in support of his application; however, no such morning report was attached to the application.  

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant military records for the period under review were not made available to the Board.  However, there were sufficient documents remaining in a reconstructed record for the Board to conduct a fair and impartial review of this case.  

A partially legible separation document (DD Form 214) and Certificate of Military Service (NA Form 13038) on file confirm that the applicant served on active duty from 8 March 1968 through 3 December 1969.  The DD Form 214 confirms that he was honorably discharged in the rank of specialist four (SP4) after completing 
1 year, 8 months, and 1 day of active military service.  This document also shows that he served in the RVN for 1 year and 1 day.  

The available evidence includes no military medical records indicating that the applicant was ever wounded or injured in action while serving in the RVN.  Further, the applicant provides no independent evidence in the form of medical treatment records or witness statements to corroborate his claim that he was injured in action while serving in the RVN. 

In connection with the processing of this case, a member of the Board 
staff reviewed the Department of the Army (DA) Vietnam Casualty Roster, 
which contains the names of those soldiers wounded or injured in action in the RVN.  The applicant’s name was not included in this DA list of RVN casualties.  

Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes the Army’s awards policy. Paragraph 2-8 contains guidance on awarding the Purple Heart.  It states, in pertinent part, that the PH is authorized to members who are wounded in action.  

The awards regulation defines a wound as an injury to any part of the body from an outside force or agent sustained in action.  It also stipulates that the wound for which a PH is being awarded must have required treatment by a medical officer, and the records of medical treatment for the wound or injury for which the PH is being awarded must have been made a matter of official record.  It also provides examples of injuries that do and do not qualify for award of the PH.  Included in the list of those injuries that clearly do not qualify for award of the PH are accidents, to include explosive, aircraft, vehicular, and other accidental wounding not related to or caused by enemy action. 

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.  The Board notes the applicant’s contention that he is entitled to the PH.  However, it finds insufficient evidence to support this claim.  By regulation, in order to award the PH it is necessary to establish that a soldier was wounded in action, that the wound required treatment by a medical officer, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.

2.  The available evidence provides no indication that the applicant was ever wounded in action or that he was ever treated for a wound or injury received in action while serving in the RVN, as evidenced by the absence of his name on the DA Vietnam Casualty Roster.  Further, the applicant has failed to provide any independent evidence to support his claim of entitlement to the PH.  

3.  In view of the facts of this case, the Board finds the regulatory burden of proof required to support award of the PH has not been met.  Therefore, it is compelled deny his request for the PH based solely on the lack of evidence, in the interest of all those who served in the RVN and who faced similar circumstances.  

4.  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 this requirement.

5.  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

__MKP__  __REB__  __FCJ __  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003086505	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2003/06/DD	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1969/12/03	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200	
DISCHARGE REASON	Overseas Returnee	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  61	107.0015	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.