RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:         19 September 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060002672


      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. Joseph A. Adriance            |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |MR. James E. Anderholm            |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Meribeth Love                 |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Thomas M. Ray                 |     |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, he suffered an injury to his right
hand while serving with the 36th Engineers in the Republic of Vietnam
(RVN).  He states that he was on a special assignment working on a Naval
Vessel and his hand was crushed by a post while docking the boat.  He
received medical treatment for this injury, and was placed on 15 days of
convalescent leave to recover from the wound.

3.  The applicant provides no additional documentary evidence in support of
his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
that occurred on 29 July 1971, the date of his release from active duty.
The application submitted in this case is dated 14 February 2006.

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 that he was inducted into the Army and
entered active duty on 7 October 1969.  He was trained in, awarded, and
served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 52F (Electrician), and the
highest rank he attained while serving on active duty was specialist four
(SP4).

4.  The applicant's Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) confirms he
served in the RVN from 19 July 1970 through 21 July 1971.  Item 38 shows
that during his RVN assignment, he was assigned to Company C, 36th Engineer
Battalion, performing duties in MOS 52F as an electrician.  Item 40
(Wounds) is blank, and the PH is not included in the list of authorized
awards contained in Item 41 (Awards and Decorations).

5.  Item 41 of the applicant's DA Form 20 shows he earned the following
awards and decorations during his active duty tenure:  National Defense
Service Medal (NDSM); Vietnam Service Medal (VSM); RVN Campaign Medal with
60 Device; Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM); and Expert Marksmanship
Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar.  Item 48 (Date of Audit) shows the
applicant last audited his DA Form 20 in July 1971.

6.  On 29 July 1971, the applicant was honorably released from active duty
after completing a total of 1 year, 7 months, and 8 days of creditable
active military service, and accruing 75 days of time lost due to being
absent without leave (AWOL).  Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges,
Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the
separation document
(DD Form 214) he was issued upon his separation shows he earned the
following awards during his active duty tenure:  ARCOM; NDSM; VSM; and RVN
Campaign Medal.

7.  During the processing of this case, a member of the Board staff
reviewed the Department of the Army (DA) Vietnam Casualty Roster.  This
roster contains an entry pertaining to the applicant that shows he was
wounded/injured/ill in the  RVN on 8 October 1970.  However, the entry
contains a code indicating the applicant's wound/injury/illness was non-
hostile.

8.  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 the PH is awarded to any member who has been wounded or killed
in action.

9.  Paragraph 2-13 of the awards regulation contains guidance on the
Vietnam Service Medal.  It states, in pertinent part, that a bronze service
star is authorized with this award for each campaign a member is credited
with while serving in the RVN.

10.  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 (36th Engineer Battalion)
earned the Meritorious Unit Commendation (MUC) and RVN Gallantry Cross with
Palm Unit Citation.  It also shows that during this period, credit was
granted for the Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase VII and Consolidation I
campaigns.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's claim of entitlement to the PH was carefully
considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence to support granting
the requested relief.

2.  The applicant's record is void of any indication that he was wounded as
a result of enemy action while serving the RVN.  Item 40 of his DA Form 20
is blank, which indicates he was never wounded in action.  The PH is not
included in Item 41, and the applicant last audited his DA Form 20 in July
1970 during his separation processing, subsequent to his completing his RVN
tour of duty.

3.  The PH is not included in the list of awards contained on the
applicant's DD Form 214, and the applicant authenticated this document with
his signature on the date of his separation.  In effect, his signature was
his verification that the information contained on the separation document,
to include the list of awards, was correct at the time the document was
prepared and issued.  His name does appear on the Vietnam Casualty Roster;
however, his wound/injury/illness was coded as non-hostile on this report.
Absent any evidence confirming the applicant was wounded as a result of
enemy action, 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 now under consideration related to award of the PH on 29 July
1971, the date of his separation from active duty.  Therefore, the time for
him to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on
28 July 1974.  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 the applicant earned the Expert
Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar, and that based on his RVN
service and campaign participation, he is entitled to the MUC, RVN
Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, and 2 bronze service stars with
his VSM.  Thus,
it would also be appropriate to add these awards to his record and
separation document at this time.  The omission of these awards from his
separation document is an administrative matter that does not require Board
action.  Therefore, the Case Management Support Division (CMSD), St. Louis,
Missouri will correct his records 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

___JEA  _  __ML ___  __TMR __  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 determined that administrative error in the records of the
individual 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, 2 bronze
service stars with his Vietnam Service Medal, and Expert Marksmanship
Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar; and by providing him a correction to
his separation document that includes these awards.




                            _____James E. Anderholm __
                                      CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060002672                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2006/09/19                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1971/07/29                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |OS Rtn                                  |
|BOARD DECISION          |Denial w/note                           |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.  46   |107.0000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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