| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Deborah L. Brantley | Senior Analyst |
| Mr. Fred N. Eichorn | Chairperson | |
| Mr. John P. Infante | Member | |
| Ms. Karen A. Heinz | Member |
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests award of the Purple Heart.
2. The applicant states he received shell fragment wounds “in Vietnam under combat conditions” and is currently receiving disability compensation for residuals of the wound. He notes he never received the Purple Heart.
3. He states that X-rays show a metallic foreign body in his neck, which he knew about. He states, however, he did not know he could have his records corrected.
4. The applicant states he was actually wounded twice in Vietnam; once in December 1968 when he was wounded in the lower right leg and then again in January 1969 when he was hit by a fragment from a 122mm rocket. He notes that neither wound was serious and so he received no treatment.
5. The applicant provides a copy of his Department of Veterans Affairs rating document.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant is requesting correction of an error which occurred on
25 October 1969. The application submitted in this case is dated 2 May 2003.
2. Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file within the 3-year statute of limitation if the ABCMR determines that it would be in the interest of justice to do so. In this case, the ABCMR will conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.
3. Records available to the Board indicate the applicant entered active duty on
8 November 1966. He was trained as a heavy vehicle driver (64B).
4. In November 1968 he was assigned as a heavy vehicle driver with the United States Army Depot in Long Binh, Vietnam. In February 1969 he was reassigned for duty as a physical activities specialist (03C) with Headquarters and Headquarters Company, Long Binh Post.
5. In October 1969 the applicant departed Vietnam and returned to the United States. Prior to his departure he was awarded an Army Commendation Medal for meritorious service during the period October 1968 to October 1969. There is no indication he was ever awarded the Purple Heart.
6. On 25 October 1969 the applicant was released from active duty. Neither his separation document, nor his Department of the Army Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) reflects entitlement to the Purple Heart and item 40 (wounds) on his Department of the Army Form 20 is blank. The applicant authenticated the information contained on his Department of the Army Form 20 in August 1969 and his separation report was signed on the day of his release from active duty.
7. There were no medical records available to the Board, or provided by the applicant. His name is not among a list of individuals reported as combat casualties during the Vietnam War.
8. The applicant’s Department of Veterans Affairs rating decision, included with his application to this Board, is dated 13 December 2002. The decision indicates the applicant was granted a 10 percent disability rating for “cervical spine condition.” According to the rating document, the rating decision was made based on “a retained metallic foreign body” in the applicant’s neck muscles which was shown on a 1999 X-ray report, and based on the applicant’s own statement received by the Department of Veterans Affairs in September 2001.
9. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) 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.
10. A review of Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) notes the applicant would have been credited with participating in three designated campaign periods (Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase VI, TET 69 Counteroffensive, and Vietnam Summer-Fall 1969) during his period of service in Vietnam. His campaign participation should be reflected by three bronze service stars on the Vietnam Service Medal, which is reflected on his separation document.
11. The pamphlet also notes that the applicant would have been entitled to a Meritorious Unit Commendation and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. There is no medical evidence, and the applicant has not provided any, that he was wounded as a result of hostile action while in Vietnam. The fact that he is receiving disability compensation from the Department of Veterans Affairs based on a 1999 X-ray showing a metallic fragment in the applicant’s neck, and his statement is not sufficient evidence to conclude that the applicant was in fact wounded as a result of hostile action.
2. In the absence of more compelling evidence, there is no basis for an award of the Purple Heart.
3. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show, 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. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 25 October 1969; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on
24 October 1972. However, the applicant did not file within the 3-year statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation or evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse failure to file in this case.
5. Evidence shows that the applicant’s records contain administrative error which does not require action by the Board. Therefore, administrative correction of the applicant's records will be accomplished by the Case Management Support Division (CMSD), St. Louis, Missouri, as outlined by the Board in paragraph 2 of the BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION section below.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__FNE __ __JPI ___ __KAH__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2003090821 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20040205 |
| 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. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140011742
Individuals who had qualified for award of the Vietnam Service Medal and were evacuated prior to completing six months of service due to wounds resulting from hostile action were entitled to award of the Vietnam Campaign Medal. Individuals who had qualified for award of the Vietnam Service Medal and were evacuated prior to completing 6 months of service due to wounds resulting from hostile action were entitled to award of the Vietnam Campaign Medal. As a result, the Board recommends that...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070016566
The applicant's records show that he was awarded the Vietnam Service Medal. Evidence shows that the applicants records contain administrative error which does not require action by the Board. Therefore, the Board requests that the CMSD-St. Louis administratively correct the records of the individual concerned to show the awards of the ARCOM; Army Good Conduct Medal first award for the period 23 May 1968 to 22 May 1970; Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation; Republic...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040001817C070208
The applicant states that he had a shrapnel wound in Vietnam. In so doing, the VA noted that although his service medical records showed no evidence of a shrapnel wound, reasonable doubt was resolved in his favor that this [his wound] was a residual from a combat injury. The VA, in awarding the applicant a service connected disability for residuals [shrapnel] in his right arm, stated that his service medical records showed no evidence of a shrapnel wound, and despite this lack of evidence...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090021103
Therefore, the preponderance of evidence in this case is sufficient to award the applicant the Purple Heart for wounds received on 16 July 1970 in the Republic of Vietnam. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by awarding the applicant the: * Purple Heart for wounds received on 16 July 1970 in the Republic of Vietnam * Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 19 November 1968 to 28 October 1970 2. The Board also...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100013250
This decision states, in pertinent part, "Service medical records show he suffered a minor fragment wound in the back of the neck in January 1970 when he was struck by fragments of an AK-47 bullet which had hit his aircraft. There is no evidence of record which shows the applicant was wounded or injured as a result of hostile action in Vietnam. In the absence of orders or other evidence of record showing that the applicant was injured or treated for wounds as a result of hostile action in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090001981
The VA's Compensation and Pension Exam Hospital Summary shows that on 26 March 1969, the applicant was admitted with a chief complaint of pain at left ankle area where he had an old gunshot wound. The applicant's military service records do not contain any general orders awarding him the Purple Heart. There are no medical records available which show that the applicant was wounded or treated for wounds as a result of hostile action during his service in Vietnam.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060003538C070205
There are no medical records available which show the applicant was wounded or treated for wounds as a result of hostile action during his service in Vietnam. There is no reason to doubt the statements provided by the applicant’s former platoon leader, rifleman, and medic; however, without medical evidence verifying the applicant's wounding, there is an insufficient basis for award of the Purple Heart in this case. As a result, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110012856
The applicant requests reconsideration of his earlier request for correction of his military records to show award of the Purple Heart for wounds received in action in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN). The VA Rating Decision provided by the applicant is new evidence that should be considered by the Board. The original Record of Proceedings states: a. the applicant's DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) does not show he was wounded; b. there was an absence of evidence showing the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070005398
The applicant states, in effect, that while he was serving in the Republic of Vietnam, he sustained and was treated for a fragment wound in February 1969. The applicant provided copies of the following documentations in support of his application: a. Self-authored letter responding to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) denial letter dated 4 April 2007 of his request for award of the Purple Heart dated 25 August 2006. b. However, the original Board consideration of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 03099031C070212
In that claim he states that he had sustained a shrapnel wound to his left shoulder in March 1969 and received medical treatment at a medical evacuation center. Such documentation could serve as a basis to grant the applicant’s request for award of the Purple Heart. Therefore, the Board requests that the CMSD-St. Louis administratively correct the records of the individual concerned to show two awards of the Air Medal, a “V” device on his Army Commendation Medal, four bronze service stars...