RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        19 JANUARY 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2004106590


      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. Kenneth H. Aucock             |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Bernard Ingold                |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Larry Bergquist               |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Delia Trimble                 |     |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 and the Bronze Star
Medal.

2.  The applicant states that during a firefight a noncommissioned officer
(NCO) ordered him to get a wounded Soldier, which he did.  Many years later
he was able to locate the NCO, who told him that he had recommended him for
the Bronze Star Medal, and asked him if he had received it.  He states that
he was wounded inside the base camp when we [members of his patrol] came
under fire. He was hit in the face by shrapnel and taken to the 25th Med.


3.  The applicant provides a copy of a clinical record.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
which occurred on 8 October 1969.  The application submitted in this case
is dated      23 March 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 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.  The applicant requested correction of his records to show award of the
Bronze Star Medal.  There are no orders or other evidence authorizing this
award.  In the absence of a proper award authority for this decoration, the
applicant may request award of the Bronze Star Medal under the provisions
of Section 1130 of Title 10, United States Code.  The applicant has been
notified by separate correspondence of the procedures for applying for this
decoration under Section 1130 and, as a result, it will not be discussed
further in the Record of Proceedings.

4.  The applicant was inducted into the Army on 9 October 1967, trained as
an infantryman, and in June 1968 was assigned to Company C, 3d Battalion,
  22nd Infantry, a 25th Infantry Division unit in Vietnam.  He was awarded
the Combat Infantryman Badge on 28 July 1968.

5.  A 23 September 1968 clinical record originated by the "3/22" to the
25th Med contains the remark "Explosion in sump (?? M79) this AM.  Question
of frag between eyes.  Please evaluate and treat as you see fit."

6.  On 28 September 1968 the applicant returned to the United States on
emergency leave.  On 24 October 1968 he was attached to an artillery
battery at Fort Sill, Oklahoma, and on 7 November of that year assigned to
the Artillery Missile Center at Fort Sill.

7.  The applicant served in Vietnam approximately three months,
participating in two campaigns.  The 3d Battalion, 22nd Infantry was
awarded the Valorous Unit Award, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross
Unit Citation with Palm, and the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor
Medal First Class Unit Citation for its actions during his assignment to
that organization.

8.  The applicant was released from active duty at Fort Sill on 8 October
1969.  His DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or Discharge) does not show
award of the Purple Heart.  Item 40 (Wounds) on his DA Form 20 (Enlisted
Qualification Record) contains no entry.  That form does not show award of
the Purple Heart.

9.  Prior to his release from active duty, the applicant underwent a
medical examination.  The report of medical examination contained the
remark that the applicant had an emotionally unstable personality, but
shows that he was medically qualified for separation.  That report made no
mention that he had been wounded or injured.  However, in the report of
medical history that the applicant furnished for the examination, he stated
that he had been hit in the head by shrapnel in 1968.

10.  In 1977 and again in 1978 the applicant queried St. Louis regarding
award of the Purple Heart, stating that he was hit by an explosion in the
field and told that he would receive the Purple Heart.  He stated that he
was sent home because of a death in the family.

11.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides 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.

12.  U.S. Army Vietnam (USARV) Regulation 672-1 (Decorations and Awards)
provided, in pertinent part, for award of the Purple Heart.  The regulation
stated that authority to award the Purple Heart was delegated to hospital
commanders.  Further, it directed that all personnel treated and released
within 24 hours would be awarded the Purple Heart by the organization to
which the individual was assigned.  Personnel requiring hospitalization in
excess of 24 hours or evacuation from Vietnam would be awarded the Purple
Heart directly by the hospital commander rendering treatment.

13.  The Vietnam Casualty Roster maintained by this agency does not show
that the applicant was wounded in action.

14.  Service (campaign) medals and service ribbons denote honorable
performance of military duty within specified limited dates in specified
geographical areas.  Army Regulation 600-8-22, paragraph 6-7 provides for
service stars for wear on campaign and service ribbons to denote an
additional award, and states that service stars are authorized for wear on
the Vietnam Service Medal.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The pertinent evidence in this case is a 1968 clinical record that
shows that the applicant was referred for treatment as a result of an
explosion that might have been caused by an M79 [a grenade launcher
possessed by American forces in Vietnam].  Notwithstanding the applicant's
contention, this evidence is insufficient to show that he was wounded as a
result of enemy action.  Therefore, he is not entitled to award of the
Purple Heart.

2.  The applicant participated in two campaigns while in Vietnam.  He is
entitled to award of the Vietnam Service Medal with two bronze service
stars (one for each campaign).

3.  The applicant is entitled to award of the Valorous Unit Award, the
Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm, and the
Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation.


4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 8 October 1969; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on            7 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 timely file in this case.

5.  The evidence shows that the applicant’s record contains administrative
error that does not require action by the Board.  The necessary corrections
will be accomplished administratively by the Case Management Support
Division (CMSD), St. Louis, Missouri, as outlined in paragraph 3 of the
Determination/Recommendation section below.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___BI ___  ___LB __  ___DT __  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.  As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence
provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year
statute of limitations prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient
basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for
correction of the records of the individual concerned.

3.  The Case Management Support Division in St. Louis is requested to
correct the applicant's records to show award of the Vietnam Service Medal
with two bronze service stars, the Valorous Unit Award, the Republic of
Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm, and the Republic of
Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation.




                                  _____ Bernard Ingold_______
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2004106590                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050119                                |
|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.                      |                                        |


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