RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        27 September 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040009917


      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. Klaus P. Schumann             |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Ronald E. Blakely             |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Lawrence Foster               |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. LaVerne M. Douglas            |     |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, in effect, award of the Purple Heart and
correction of his separation document (DD Form 214) to show the Soldier’s
Medal.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he sustained wounds in the
Republic of Vietnam (RVN) in 1968 while assigned to the 1st Infantry
Division.  He further states, while in a staging area at Li Khe preparing
for a convoy, it came under rocket and mortar fire.  He states that a
mortar hit close to his jeep and he was blown out of the jeep and the
mounted M-60 hit him over the left eye.  As a result, he needed six
stitches to close the wound.  He states that a field medic cared for and
dressed his wound and subsequently removed his stitches six days later.  No
entries were made in his health records because he was not with his parent
unit at the time, nor was he provided any type of document indicating the
treatment he received.  He further states that he did not miss duty as a
result of the injuries he sustained.

3.  The applicant provides, in support of his application, a copy of his
separation document (DD Form 214), effective 23 January 1969; a self-
authored statement, dated 25 October 2004; an undated Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) Statement in Support of Claim; a third party
statement, dated 13 February 2002; a Department of the Army Awards
Certificate for the Soldier’s Medal, dated
28 August 1968; and a Chronological Record of Medical Care (SF 600), dated
4-9 May 1968.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
which occurred on 23 January 1969.  The application submitted in this case
is dated
25 October 2004.

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 record shows he was inducted into the Army and entered
active duty on 21 June 1967.  He was trained in and awarded military
occupational specialty (MOS) 95B (Military Policeman).  His Enlisted
Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows he served in the RVN from
11 November 1967 through 21 January 1969.  During his RVN tour, he was
assigned to 1st Military Police Company, 1st Infantry Division.

4.  Item 40 (Wounds) of the applicant’s DA Form 20 is blank and contains no
entry indicating that he was ever wounded/injured as a result of combat
action.  In addition, his military records contain no orders or other
documents that indicate he ever received a wound/injury as a direct result
of, or that was caused by, enemy action.  Further, there are no documents
on file in his records showing he was ever recommended for, or awarded, the
PH or that he was ever treated for a combat related wound or injury.  There
are no medical treatment records on file indicating he was treated for a
combat related wound or injury at anytime during his tenure on active duty.


5.  The applicant provides a chronological record of medical care (SF 600)
which shows that for the period 4 May 1968 through 9 May 1968 he was
treated for a laceration over his left brow.  However, there is no
indication that this injury was sustained as a result of combat action.

6.  The applicant also provides a third party statement, dated 13 February
2002, from a Soldier assigned with him in the RVN, which states that “he
was injured in a jeep accident in August or September 1968 while we were
serving in Vietnam.” The statement provides no indication of the
circumstances surrounding the jeep accident or that it was as a result of
enemy action.

7.  The applicant provides two pictures of himself, apparently taken while
he was assigned in the RVN, which show that he had a bandage attached above
his left brow.  However, the pictures provide no indication when it was
taken, nor does it provide any insight into the circumstances which caused
the applicant’s apparent injury.

8.  The applicant’s military record contains Headquarters, 1st Infantry
Division General Orders 5917, dated 24 June 1968, which shows that he was
awarded the Soldier’s Medal for heroism not involving actual conflict with
an armed enemy in the RVN on 6 March 1968.

9.  On 23 January 1969, the applicant was honorably released from active
duty after completing a total of 1 year, 7 months, and 3 days of active
military service. The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time shows he earned
the Army Commendation Medal, the National Defense Service Medal, the
Vietnam Service Medal and the Vietnam Campaign Medal during his Army
service.  He authenticated this document with his signature on the date of
his separation.

10.  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 official list of
Soldiers who were reported as RVN battle casualties.

11.  Army Regulation (AR) 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent
part, 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.  This regulation also provides that there is no statute of
limitations on requests for award of the Purple Heart.

12.  AR 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part, for award
of the Vietnam Service Medal.  This medal is awarded to all members of the
Armed Forces of the United States for qualifying service in Vietnam after
3 July 1965 through 28 March 1973.  Qualifying service included attachment
to or assignment for 1 or more days with an organization participating in
or directly supporting military operations.

13.  AR 600-8-22 (Military Awards), provides, in pertinent part, that a
silver service star is authorized in lieu of five bronze service stars.

14.  AR 600-8-200 (Military Awards) provides in pertinent part that the
Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation is
awarded by the Vietnamese Government as a unit award for meritorious
service
15.  Paragraph 6 of Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation
and Campaign Participation Credit Register) states that not more than one
Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation will be worn by any individual,
thereby, precluding wear of the Vietnamese Fourragere that represents
multiple awards of the Vietnam Gallantry Cross.  The regulation provides
that, although multiple awards of this unit citation are not authorized for
wear, official military and historical records will indicate all awards
received.  However, the regulation also states that, in the case of
duplicate awards covering the same period of time only, one award will be
recorded in official military and historical records.

16.  Table B-1 of the awards regulation contains a list of campaigns and it
shows that during the applicant’s tenure of assignment in the RVN, he was
credited with participating in the following five campaigns:  Vietnam
Counteroffensive III, Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase IV, Vietnam
Counteroffensive Phase V, Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase VI and TET
Counteroffensive.

17.  Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit
Register) establishes the eligibility of individual members for campaign
participation credit, assault-landing credit, and unit citation badges
awarded during the Vietnam Conflict.  It confirms that during his tenure of
assignment in the RVN, the applicant’s unit (1st Military Police Company,
1st Infantry Division) received the Meritorious Unit Commendation, RVN
Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, and the RVN Civil Actions First
Class Honor Medal.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record confirms that the applicant was awarded the
Soldier’s Medal for Heroism in the RVN on 6 March 1968.  Therefore, it is
appropriate to correct his record to reflect this award at this time.

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

3.  The evidence of record provides no confirmation that the applicant was
ever wounded/injured in action.  Item 40 of his DA Form 20 is blank,
indicating he was never wounded in action.  His Military Personnel Record
Jacket (MPRJ) is void of any documentary evidence that shows he was ever
wounded in action, or awarded the PH.

4.  Further, the PH is not included in the list of authorized awards listed
on the applicant’s his DD Form 214, which he authenticated with his
signature.  His signature on the separation document confirms he verified
the information it contained was correct, to include the list of awards, at
the time it was prepared and issued.  Finally, his name is not included on
the RVN Casualty Roster, the official DA list of RVN battle casualties.

5.  Although the veracity of the applicant's claim that he sustained his
injuries in the RVN is not in question, lacking any corroborating evidence
of record showing that his wound/injury was the direct result of or caused
by enemy action, the regulatory burden of proof necessary to support award
of the PH has not been satisfied in this case.  As a result, his request
for the PH must be denied in the interest of all those who served in the
RVN and who faced similar circumstances.

6.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 23 January 1967.  Therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on 22 January 1970.  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 statute
of limitations on requests for award of the Purple Heart.

7.  The evidence shows that based on his service and campaign participation
in the RVN, the applicant is entitled to the Meritorious Unit Commendation,
the RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, the RVN Civil Actions
First Class Honor Medal, the RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation,
and 1 silver service star with his Vietnam Service Medal.  The omission of
these awards from his record is an administrative matter and does not
require Board action to correct.  Thus, the administrative correction of
his record 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 FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__reb___  __lf____  __lmd___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented does not demonstrate
the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board
determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis
for correction of the records of the individual concerned.

2.  The Board determined that administrative error in the records of the
individual should be corrected.  Therefore, it is requested that the CMSD-
St. Louis administratively correct the records of the individual concerned
to that he was awarded the Soldier’s Medal and to show that, based on his
service and campaign participation in the RVN, he is entitled to the
Meritorious Unit Commendation, the RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit
Citation, the RVN Civil Actions First Class Honor Medal, the RVN Gallantry
Cross with Palm Unit Citation, and 1 silver service star with his Vietnam
Service Medal.




                                        Ronald E. Blakely
                                  ______________________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040009917                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050927                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |(DENY)                                  |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |107.0015                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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