RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:            16 November 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:   AR20060005211


      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. Jessie B. Strickland          |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Jeffrey Redmann               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Robert Soniak                 |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. David Tucker                  |     |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 that his records be corrected to reflect three
awards of the Purple Heart (PH w/two OLC).

2.  The applicant states that he received three awards of the Purple Heart
and his report of separation only reflects one award.  He goes on to state
that his first award of the Purple Heart was in February 1970, when he
received shrapnel in his left elbow from a land mine that his tank ran
over, that his second award was in April 1970, when his tank ran over a
land mine and he received shrapnel in his left knee, and his third Purple
Heart was in August 1970 when he was blown off of a tank and injured both
hips.

3.  The applicant provides no supporting documents with his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on 28 November 1970.  The application submitted in this case is
dated 28 March 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.  He was inducted in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania on 16 May 1968 and was
transferred to Fort Jackson, South Carolina, to undergo his basic combat
training (BCT).  He was honorably discharged on 21 May 1968 for the purpose
of enlisting in the Regular Army.

4.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 22 May 1968 for a period of 3 years
and training as a communications equipment repairman.  He completed his BCT
and was transferred to Fort Monmouth, New Jersey to undergo his advanced
individual training (AIT).

5.  He did not complete that training and was transferred to Fort Knox,
Kentucky in May 1969 to undergo AIT as an armor crewman.  He successfully
completed that training and on 2 January 1970, he was transferred to
Vietnam for assignment to B Troop, 1st. Squadron, 1st  Cavalry Division, as
an armor crewman.

6.  He was promoted to the pay grade of E-5 on 6 July 1970 and on 18 July
1970, he was treated for injuries and abrasions to his right leg, thigh and
knee from being thrown from a track vehicle.  He was reported as a battle
casualty and his records were annotated accordingly.  There is no evidence
in the available records to show that he was awarded the Purple Heart.
Additionally, his name is recorded on the Vietnam Casualty Listing for his
18 July 1970 injuries.

7.  He departed Vietnam on 28 November 1970 and was transferred to Fort
Lewis, Washington, where he was honorably released from active duty
(REFRAD) on 28 November 1970 as an overseas returnee.  He had served
2 years, 6 months and 13 days of total active service and his DD Form 214
issued at the time of his REFRAD shows that he was awarded the National
Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM), the Combat
Infantryman Badge, the Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) with one oak leaf
cluster (1OLC), the Bronze Star Medal, the Republic of Vietnam Campaign
Medal and the Expert Marksmanship Badge with M14 bar.

8.  A review of his records shows that on 15 July 1970, he was awarded the
ARCOM with “V” Device and 1ST OLC (1OLC).

9.  On 9 December 1981, in response to an inquiry from the Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA), the Reserve Components Personnel Administration
Center (RCPAC) issued a Correction to DD Form 214 (DD Form 215) showing the
applicant’s award of the Purple Heart.  The RCPAC also conducted a morning
report search to verify the applicant’s claim that he had been wounded
three times and the search failed to verify the two additional injuries
claimed by the applicant.

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 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 are no time limitations for requests
for award of the Purple Heart.

11.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign
Participation Credit Register-Vietnam War) was published to assist
commanders and personnel officers in determining or establishing the
eligibility of individual members for campaign participation credit,
assault landing credit, and unit citation badges awarded during the Vietnam
Conflict.  The pamphlet indicates that subsequent to the applicant’s
departure from Vietnam, his unit was awarded the Republic of Vietnam
Gallantry Cross with Palm (RVNGC w/Palm) Unit Citation.  Additionally, the
applicant participated in three campaigns while in Vietnam and thus is
authorized to wear three bronze service stars on his already awarded VSM.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  While the available evidence of record contains no orders awarding the
applicant the Purple Heart, there is sufficient evidence available to show
that he was injured as a result of enemy action on 18 July 1970 and thus is
entitled to the award of the Purple Heart for that wound.  Therefore, it is
reasonable that he was awarded the Purple Heart for that wound as he
contends and that award has already been added to his records.

2.  However, the applicant has failed to show through the evidence
submitted or the evidence of record that he was awarded two additional
awards of the Purple Heart as he contends.  Therefore, lacking such
evidence, there appears to be no basis to add two additional awards of the
Purple Heart to his records at this time.
3.  His records do show that he was awarded the ARCOM with “V” Device and
1OLC and those awards are not correctly reflected on his DD Form 214.
Accordingly, it would be in the interest of justice to do so at this time.


4.  Additionally, the evidence shows that he is entitled to be awarded the
RVNGC w/Palm Unit Citation and three bronze service stars for wear on his
already awarded VSM to denote his campaign participation.

5.  Evidence shows that the applicant’s records contain administrative
error which does not require action by the Board.  Therefore,
administrative correction of the applicant’s records will be accomplished
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.

6.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 28 November 1970; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on
27 November 1973.  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.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___JR___  ___RS __  ___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 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 he was awarded the ARCOM w/ “V” Device and 1OLC vice the
ARCOM w/1OLC as currently reflected on his DD Form 214 and by awarding him
the RVNGC w/Palm Unit Citation and three bronze service stars for wear on
his already awarded VSM.





                                  ____ Jeffrey Redmann______
                                            CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060005211                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20061116                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD)                                    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |19701128                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200, CH 5, SEC VII               |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |REFRAD                                  |
|BOARD DECISION          |(DENY W/NOTE)                           |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |AR 15-185                               |
|ISSUES                  |61/PH                                   |
|1.107.0015              |                                        |
|2.107.0094              |140/RVNGC                               |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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