RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:         29 November 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050007835


      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             |
|     |Ms. Yvonne Foskey                 |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Stanley Kelley                |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Melvin H. Meyer               |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. LeVerne 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 (PH).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was never awarded the PH for
the shrapnel wound he sustained to his right hand while serving in the
Republic of Vietnam (RVN).  He claims he was treated for this injury in
October 1967, at the 17th Field Hospital in Saigon.  He further states he
would like to be awarded his PH so that he may give the award to his
family.

3.  The applicant provides a Self-Authored Letter and Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) Rating Decision in support of his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
that occurred on 28 December 1967.  The application submitted in this case
is dated 23 March 2005.

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 enlisted in the Regular Army and
entered active duty on the enlistment under review on 22 January 1965.  He
served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 71L (Administrative
Specialist), and the highest rank he attained while serving on active duty
was specialist five (SP5).

4.  The applicant’s Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows he
served in the RVN from 17 May 1967 through 27 December 1967.  During his
RVN tour, he was assigned to the United States Military Assistance Command
– Vietnam (MACV), Advance Team 96, from 26 May 1967 through 26 December
1967, performing duties in MOS 71L as a booking clerk.

5.  Item 40 (Wounds) of the applicant’s DA Form 20 is blank, and Item 41
(Awards and Decorations) does not include the PH in the list of authorized
awards entered.
6.  The applicant’s Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) contains no
orders or other documents that indicate he was ever wounded in action, or
awarded the PH.  There are also no medical treatment records on file in the
MPRJ that indicate he was ever treated for a combat related wound or
injury.

7.  On 28 December 1967, the applicant was honorably separated after
completing a total of 12 years, 4 months and 26 days of active military
service.  The separation document (DD Form 214) he was issued shows he
earned the following awards during the period of active duty service
covered by the DD Form 214:  National Defense Service Medal (NDSM); Vietnam
Service Medal (VSM) and RVN Campaign Medal. The applicant authenticated the
separation document with his signature on the date of his separation.

8.  During the processing of this case, a member of the Board staff
reviewed the Department of the Army (DA) Vietnam Casualty Roster.  This
search failed to reveal the applicant’s name among the list of RVN battle
casualties.

9.  The applicant provides a copy of a VA Rating Decision, dated 10 July
1994, which granted him service connection for fragment wound to right
hand.  This document contains no reference to any military medical records
that confirm the injury he sustained was combat related.

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy and
criteria concerning individual military awards.  Paragraph 2-8 contains the
regulatory guidance pertaining to awarding the PH.  It states, in pertinent
part, that in order to award a PH there must be evidence that a member was
wounded or injured as a result of enemy action.  The wound or injury for
which the PH is being awarded must have required treatment by a medical
officer, this treatment must be supported by medical treatment records that
were made a matter of official record.

11.  Paragraph 2-13 of the awards regulation contains guidance on the VSM.
It states, in pertinent part, that a bronze service star is authorized with
this award for each RVN campaign a member is credited with participating
in.

12.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign
Participation Credit Register) shows that during the applicant’s tenure of
assignment in the RVN, his unit (MACV) was awarded the Meritorious Unit
Commendation and Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit
Citation; and campaign credit was granted for the Vietnam Counteroffensive
Phase II, Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase III, and TET Counteroffensive
campaigns.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s claim of entitlement to the PH and the supporting
documents he provided were carefully considered.  However, by regulation,
in order to award the PH it is necessary to establish that a Soldier was
wounded as a result of enemy action, that the wound required treatment by
military medical personnel and that the medical treatment was made a matter
of official record.

2.  There are no orders, or other documents on file in the applicant’s MPRJ
indicating he was ever wounded in action, or recommended for or awarded the
PH.  Further, his record is void of any medical treatment records showing
he was ever treated for a combat related wound or injury.  Item 40 of his
DA Form 20 is blank, indicating he was never wounded or injured in action,
and his name is not included on the Vietnam Casualty Roster, the official
DA list of RVN battle casualties.

3.  The veracity of the applicant’s claim that he received a shrapnel wound
in the RVN is not in question.  However, absent any evidence of record
corroborating that he received this injury as a result of enemy action, or
that he was ever treated for a combat related wound or injury by military
medical personnel, the regulatory burden of proof necessary to support
award of the PH has not been satisfied in this case.

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice related to award of the PH now under consideration on 28 December
1967.  Therefore, the time for him to file a request for correction of any
error or injustice expired on 27 December 1970.  He failed to 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 of record does show that based on his RVN service and
campaign participation, the applicant is entitled to the Meritorious Unit
Commendation, RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation and 3 bronze
service stars with his VSM.  The omission of these awards from his record
is an administrative matter that does not require Board action to correct.
Therefore, his records will be corrected by the Case Management Support
Division (CMSD), St. Louis, Missouri, as outlined by the Board in paragraph
3 of the
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION section below.
BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___SK __  __ MHM       __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 related to award of the
Purple Heart.  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 Board did determine there is an administrative error in the records
of the individual that should be corrected.  Therefore, the Board requests
that the CMSD-St. Louis administratively correct the records of the
individual concerned to show his entitlement to the Meritorious Unit
Commendation, Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation
and 3 bronze service stars with his Vietnam Service Medal; and by providing
him a correction to this separation document that includes these changes.




                                  _____Stanley Kelley_______
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050007835                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005-11-29                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1967/12/28                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR635-200 . . . . .                     |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |Chapter 5                               |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |107                                     |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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