RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	   5 April 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060012456 


	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.



	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, that he be awarded the Purple Heart.

2.  The applicant essentially states that he was wounded in combat twice, but because he did not want his family notified that he was injured, he was not allowed to apply for the Purple Heart.  He also states, in effect, that he believes that he should have been allowed to apply for the Purple Heart, and would now like to request that it be awarded to him, and that his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) be corrected to show the award of the Purple Heart.

3.  The applicant provides his DD Form 214, a self-authored statement, extracts of his medical records which show, in pertinent part, that he injured his wrist when he fell from a truck, and copies of photographs in support of this application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which occurred on 18 October 1968, the date of his release from active duty.  The application submitted in this case is dated 22 August 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 military records show that he was inducted into the Army of the United States on 31 October 1966.  He completed basic and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 64A (Light Vehicle Driver), and was later awarded MOS 64B (Heavy Vehicle Driver).  
After initially serving at Dugway Proving Grounds, Utah, he departed for the Republic of Vietnam on 26 November 1967, and served with the 442nd Transportation Company during his tour in Vietnam.  He returned to the 



continental United States on or about 17 October 1968, and on 18 October 1968, 
he was honorably released from active duty.  The DD Form 214 that was issued to him at the time of his release from active duty shows that he was awarded the Good Conduct Medal, the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal, and the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal.

4.  Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant’s DD Form 214 does not show that he was awarded the Purple Heart.  The applicant did not provide any orders which show that he was awarded the Purple Heart.  The applicant did provide extracts of his medical records which essentially show that he injured his wrist on or about 4 March 1968, but these extracts do not show that his wrist injury was sustained as a result of hostile action against the enemy.  Additionally, the applicant’s name is not listed on the Vietnam Casualty Roster.

5.  The applicant essentially stated that he was wounded in combat twice, but because he did not want his family notified that he was injured, he was not allowed to apply for the Purple Heart.  However, there has never been a policy which precluded award of the Purple Heart merely because a Soldier did not want his or her next of kin notified of any wounds or injuries incurred in action.  

6.  During a review of the applicant’s records, it was determined that he is entitled to additional awards and decorations that are not shown on his DD Form 214.  

7.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) lists the unit awards received by units serving in 
Vietnam.  This document shows that at the time of the applicant’s assignment to the 442nd Transportation Company, the unit was cited for award of the Meritorious Unit Commendation by Department of the Army General Orders Number 54, dated 1968.  This document also shows that it was cited for award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation by Department of the Army General Orders Number 8, dated 1974.

8.  The applicant’s records essentially show that he was awarded the Vietnam Service Medal, but it does not show that he was awarded any bronze service stars to signify campaign participation credit.  Paragraph 2-13 of Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) contains the regulatory guidance on the Vietnam Service Medal.  It states in pertinent part, that a bronze service star is authorized 



with this award for each Vietnam campaign a member is credited with participating in.  Table B-1 contains a list of Vietnam campaigns, and it shows 
that during his tenure of assignment, the applicant was credited with participating in the Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase III campaign, the TET Counteroffensive campaign, the Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase IV campaign, and the Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase V campaign.

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that the Purple Heart is awarded for a wound sustained while in action against an enemy or 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.  It also states, in pertinent part, that while clearly an individual decoration, the Purple Heart differs from all other decorations in that an individual is not "recommended" for the decoration; rather he or she is entitled to it upon meeting specific criteria.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that he should be awarded the Purple Heart.

2.  The applicant’s contention that he was not allowed to apply for award of the Purple Heart was rejected.  There has never been a policy which precluded a Soldier from receiving the Purple Heart because they did not want their next of kin notified of any wounds or injuries incurred in action.  Additionally, no Soldier had to apply for award of the Purple Heart, as they were entitled to it upon meeting specific criteria.  

3.  While the Board does not doubt the veracity of the applicant’s claim to entitlement to the Purple Heart, there is no evidence in his military records, and the applicant failed to provide any evidence which shows that he sustained wounds or injuries as a result of hostile action, that he was treated by medical personnel for those wounds, and that this treatment was made a matter of official record.  Absent such evidence, there is no basis for awarding the Purple Heart to the applicant in this case.  

4.  General orders awarded the Meritorious Unit Commendation and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation to the 442nd Transportation Company while the applicant was assigned to this unit.  Therefore, he is entitled to award of the Meritorious Unit Commendation and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, and correction of his military records to show these unit awards.

5.  The applicant participated in four campaigns during his tour in Vietnam; therefore, he is entitled to correction of his military records to show four bronze service stars to be affixed to his already awarded Vietnam Service Medal.

6.  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.

7.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 18 October 1968; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 
17 October 1971.  Although the applicant did not file within the ABCMR's statute of limitations, it is appropriate to waive failure to timely file based on the fact there is no time limitation on requests for award of the Purple Heart.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__LS____  __JR____  __SF ___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined it was appropriate to waive failure to timely file in this case.

2.  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 to show award of the Purple Heart.





3.  The Board determined that administrative error in the records of the individual concerned should be corrected.  Therefore, the Board requests that the CMSD-St. Louis administratively correct the records of the individual concerned to show the award of the Meritorious Unit Commendation and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, and by showing four bronze service stars to be affixed to his already awarded Vietnam Service Medal.





_____ Linda Simmons_______
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060012456
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
20070405
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE
YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR . . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
DENY WITH ADMIN NOTE
REVIEW AUTHORITY
AR 15-185
ISSUES         1.
107.0015.0000
2.
107.0034.0000
3.
107.0094.0000
4.
107.0073.0000 (add bronze service stars)
5.
110.0400.0000
6.