RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        10 February 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040001989


      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             |
|     |Mr. Eric S. Moore                 |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Fred Eichorn                  |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Joe R. Schroeder              |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Laverne V. Berry              |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests award of the Purple Heart.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he never received the Purple
Heart because the documentation was never submitted concerning his being
wounded in the back by a hostile rocket attack.

3.  The applicant provides a 22 April 2003 letter of support and an undated
letter of support.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on 16 April 1971, the date of his separation from active duty.
The application submitted in this case is dated 4 April 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 limitations 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.  The applicant's military records show that he entered active duty on
            9 September 1969.  He successfully completed basic training and
advanced individual training and was awarded the military occupational
specialty (MOS) 91A (Medical Corpsman).  He served in Vietnam from 10 March
1970 through   14 April 1971 as a member of the 133rd Medical Detachment.
He was honorably discharged on 16 April 1971 in the pay grade of sergeant E-
5.

4.  The applicant's DD Form 214 does not show award of the Purple Heart in
item 24 (Decoration, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign
Ribbons Awarded or Authorized).

5.  There are no orders in the applicant's records that show he was awarded
the Purple Heart.  His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) does not
show any entry in item 40 (Wounds) and does not list the Purple Heart in
item 41 (Awards and Decorations).  There are no medical records contained
in the available records.
6.  The applicant's name is not listed on the Vietnam Casualty Roster.

7.  The applicant submitted a 22 April 2003 letter from a fellow soldier.
This letter essentially states that he and the applicant were near the
latrine when a rocket, fired by the enemy landed at the rear door of the
aid station they were working.  The rocket hit their building; shrapnel
from the explosion hit the applicant in the back.  After the attack ended,
an unidentified fellow medic removed the shrapnel and cleaned and stitched
up the applicant's wound.

8.  The applicant submitted an undated letter.  The letter essentially
states that the applicant had sent him two letters during the February 1971
period.  The letter states that the applicant told him about being hit by a
piece of shrapnel that had hit a building he was working in.  He also
states that the applicant had sent him a piece of the rocket fragment in a
second letter.  Both the letters and the fragment were lost in a fire in
December 1980.

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part,
that the Purple Heart is awarded for a wound sustained while in action
against an enemy or 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. This regulation also provides that
there is no statute of limitations on requests for award of the Purple
Heart.

10.  Review of the applicant's personnel records indicate that he is
entitled to additional awards that are not shown on his DD Form 214.

11.  There is no evidence the applicant received the first award of the
Army Good Conduct Medal.  There also is no evidence that the applicant was
disqualified by his chain of command from receiving the Army Good Conduct
Medal.  His records do not contain any adverse information, and he received
conduct and efficiency ratings of "excellent" throughout his service.

12.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides that the Army Good Conduct Medal is
awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct,
efficiency and fidelity during a qualifying period of active duty enlisted
service.  The regulation states that, after 27 June 1950 to the present
time, the current standard for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal is 3
years of qualifying service, but as little as one year is required for the
first award in those cases when the period of service ends with the
termination of Federal military service.  Although there is no automatic
entitlement to the Army Good Conduct Medal, disqualification must be
justified.
13.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign
Participation Credit Register) lists the unit awards received by units
serving in Vietnam.  This document shows that, at the time of the
applicant's assignment to the 133rd Medical Detachment, it was awarded the
Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation based on
Department of the Army General Orders Number 8, dated 1974.

14.  The applicant's DD Form 214 shows he was awarded the Vietnam Service
Medal.  Appendix B of Army Regulation 600-8-22 lists, in pertinent part,
the military campaign periods of the Vietnam War.  Based on the applicant's
dates of service in Vietnam, Appendix B shows that he participated in the
following three campaigns: Vietnam Winter-Spring 1970, DA Sanctuary
Counteroffensive, and Vietnam Counteroffensive, Phase VII.

15.  Army Regulation 600-8-2, in pertinent part, authorizes award of a
bronze service star, based on qualifying service, for each campaign listed
in Appendix B of this regulation and states that authorized bronze service
stars will be worn on the appropriate service medal.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's claim of entitlement to the Purple Heart was carefully
considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence to support this
contention.  By regulation, in order to award the Purple Heart it is
necessary to establish that a soldier was wounded in action, that the wound
required treatment by a medical officer, and the treatment record must have
been made a matter of official record.

2.  The evidence provides no confirmation that the applicant was ever
wounded/injured in action.  Item 40 of his DA Form 20 is blank.  His record
is void of any documentary evidence that shows he was ever wounded in
action, or awarded the Purple Heart.

3.  Further, the Purple Heart is not included in the list of authorized
awards listed on the applicant's DD Form 214, which he authenticated with
his signature.  His signature on the separation document indicates he
verified that the information it contained was correct.  Finally, his name
is not included on the Republic of Vietnam Casualty Roster, the official DA
list of Republic of Vietnam battle casualties.

4.  Statements were provided by the applicant in support of his claim of
the Purple Heart over 35 years after the fact.  However, in absent of
corroborating evidence of record showing that he was treated for a
wound/injury that was the direct result of or caused by enemy action, the
regulatory burden of proof necessary to support award of the Purple Heart
has not been satisfied in this case.  As a result, his request for the
Purple Heart must be denied in the interest of all those who served in the
Republic of Vietnam and who faced similar circumstances.

5.  The applicant was separated on 16 April 1971 with 1 year, 7 months and
      8 days of active service and had no lost time.  The applicant's
available records do not contain evidence which would disqualify him from
receiving the Army Good Conduct Medal.  Therefore, he is entitled to award
of the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 9 September 1969 through 16
April 1971 based on completion of a period of qualifying service ending
with termination of a period of Federal military service.

6.  Records show that the applicant participated in three campaigns while
he was in Vietnam.  Therefore, he is entitled to award of three bronze
service stars to be worn on his Vietnam Service Medal.

7.  General Orders show that the applicant is entitled to award of the
Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation; therefore, his
records should be changed to show this award.

8.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 17 June 1970.  Therefore, the time for
the applicant to file a request for correction of an error or injustice
expired on 16 June 1973.  Although the applicant did not file within the
ABCMR's statute of limitations, it is appropriate to waive failure to
timely file in this case based on the fact there is no statue of
limitations on requests for award of the Purple Heart.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

___fe ___  ___lvb  __  ___jrs __  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION




BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to
warrant a recommendation for partial relief and to excuse failure to timely
file.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army
records of the individual concerned be corrected to show award of the:

      a.  Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 9 September 1969 through
16 April 1971; and

      b.  Vietnam Service Medal with three bronze service stars, and the
Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation.

2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is
insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result,
the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to
the Purple Heart.




                                  ______Fred Eichorn________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040001989                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005/02/10                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |PARTIAL RELIEF                          |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Schneider                           |
|ISSUES         1.       |107.0015                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]