MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            05 JUNE 2003      
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002082680

	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	
	Ms. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Thomas B. Redfern III		Member	
	Ms. Karen A. Heinz		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:  On 8 July 1968 a rocket exploded a few yards from him, knocking him from his vehicle onto the ground.  He states that the concussion knocked him out, caused ringing in his left ear, and “wounded [his] lower left leg.”  He states that he drove himself to the aid station, was treated, and returned to duty.  He states that he was told to return to the aid station to “fill out the paper work” but because of the fighting he never got around to it.  In support of his request he submits an undated statement from an individual who indicates that he treated the applicant on 8 July 1968 “for a minor shrapnel wound in his lower left leg.”  The author notes that the applicant received the wound while serving with him in Headquarters Battery, 8th Battalion, 4th Artillery.  He submits no medical evidence in support of his request.

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

He entered active duty on 10 October 1967 and was trained as a cook.  His Department of the Army Form 20 (enlisted qualification record) indicates the applicant was initially assigned duties as a cook with the 26th Artillery in Vietnam in March 1968 and in May 1968 was reassigned to Headquarters Battery, 8th Battalion, 4th Artillery.

In December 1968 the applicant was further reassigned to Battery A of the 8th Battalion to perform duties as a cannoneer (13A).  He was ultimately awarded a field artillery specialty (13A) in January 1969.  The applicant continued to perform duties in that arena until May 1969 when he returned to the United States.

On 14 May 1969 the applicant underwent a separation physical examination.  Neither the applicant, nor the evaluating physician, made any comments about treatment for any combat incurred injuries during the applicant’s tour of duty in Vietnam.  The physician did note a high frequency hearing loss and tinnitus, and that the applicant had been treated for an infected foot after stepping on a nail.  The physician noted that the foot was “now healed.”

On 14 May 1969 the applicant was released from active duty.  Neither his Department of Defense Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) nor his Department of the Army Form 20, reflect entitlement to the Purple Heart.  Item 40 (wounds) on his Department of the Army Form 20 is blank.

In June 1969, as part of the applicant’s initial claim for disability compensation from the Department of Veterans Affairs, he indicated that he had received treatment for a rash on his inner leg, but made no mention of any combat incurred wounds or injuries.  

Other than the applicant’s enlistment and separation physical examinations, no other service medical records were available to the Board.  The applicant’s name was not among a list of individuals reported as combat casualties during the Vietnam War.

Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that the Purple Heart is awarded for wounds 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.

A review of Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 indicates that the applicant’s unit (8th Battalion, 4th Artillery) was awarded a Meritorious Unit Commendation and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm while the applicant was a member of the organization.  Neither award, however, was reflected on his separation document.  The pamphlet also indicates that the applicant would have participated in five designated campaign periods (TET Counteroffensive, Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase IV, V and VI, and the TET 69 Counteroffensive).  A silver service star on the Vietnam Service Medal, which is reflected on the applicant’s separation document, should record his participation in those campaigns.

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.  Although the Board does note that the applicant provided a statement from the individual who claims to have treated the applicant for his combat incurred wound, there is no evidence from any official source and no medical evidence which confirms that the applicant was wounded.  In the absence of more compelling evidence, the Board concludes that the statement, rendered years after the fact, is insufficient evidence on which to base an award of the Purple Heart.

2.  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.

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.

NOTE:  Officials at the Army Review Boards Agency Support Division in St. Louis are requested to administratively correct the applicant’s separation document to reflect award of a Meritorious Unit Commendation, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm, and one silver service star on his Vietnam Service Medal.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__AAO __  __TBR__  ___KAH _  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002082680	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20030605	
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.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.