RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        20 November 2007
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070007284


      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.

|     |Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano          |     |Director             |
|     |Mr. Joseph A. Adriance            |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Eric N. Andersen              |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Donald L. Lewy                |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Rea M. Nuppenau               |     |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 wounded during an ambush
while serving in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) in 1970.

3.  The applicant provides a Standard Form (SF) 600 (Chronological Record
of Medical Care) in support of his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  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 also allows the
Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an
applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations
if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.
While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided
in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a
substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is
granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the
applicant’s failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are
insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant's record shows that he enlisted in the Regular Army (RA)
and entered active duty on 6 May 1969.  He was initially trained in and
awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 64A (Light Vehicle Driver)
and was later reclassified into 64B (Heavy Vehicle Driver) on 9 January
1970 and MOS 64C (Motor Transport Operator) on 20 August 1971.

3.  The applicant's Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows the
applicant served in the RVN from 9 October 1969 through 5 October 1970.
Item 38 (Record of Assignments) shows that during his RVN tour, he was
assigned to the 597th Transportation Company, performing duties in MOS 64B
as a heavy vehicle driver.

4.  Item 40 (Wounds) of the applicant's DA Form 20 is blank and the PH is
not included in the list of awards contained in Item 41 (Awards and
Decorations).  The applicant last audited the DA Form 20 on 15 November
1971.

5.  The applicant's Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) is void of any
documents or orders that show the applicant was ever recommended for or
awarded the PH by proper authority while serving on active duty.  The
record is also void of any medical treatment records indicating that the
applicant was ever treated for a combat related wound or injury.

6.  On 7 January 1972, the applicant was honorably released from active
duty (REFRAD) after completing a total of 2 years, 8 months, and 2 days of
active military service.  The separation document (DD Form 214) he was
issued at the time shows he earned the following awards during his active
duty tenure:  National Defense Service Medal (NDSM); Vietnam Service Medal
(VSM); Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal; and Marksman Marksmanship
Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar.

7.  The applicant provides an SF 600 that shows that on 31 August 1970, he
was treated for a cut on his right foot.  There is no information on the
treatment form regarding the facts and circumstances surrounding how the
cut was received.  The treatment form does not indicate the cut was
received as a direct result of or that it was caused by enemy action.

8.  In connection with the processing of this case, a member of the Board
staff reviewed the Department of the Army (DA) Vietnam Casualty Roster.
There was no entry on this roster pertaining to the applicant.

9.  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 military
medical personnel and this treatment must be supported by medical treatment
records that were made a matter of official record.

10.  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.  Table B-1 contains a list of RVN campaigns.  It shows that during the
applicant’s tenure of assignment, campaign credit was granted for the
Vietnam Summer-Fall 1969, Vietnam Winter-Spring 1970, Sanctuary
Counteroffensive, and the Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase VII campaigns.

11.  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 (297th Transportation Company)
was awarded the Meritorious Unit Commendation for the period 1 August 1968
through 30 April 1971 in DA General Orders Number 16, issued in 1972, and
the RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation for the period 1 August
1965 through 16 April 1971 in DA General Orders Number 54, issued in 1974.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's claim of entitlement to the PH based on wounds he
received in the RVN was carefully considered.  However, by regulation, in
order to support award of the PH, there must be evidence confirming the
wound for which the award is being made was received as a result of or was
caused by enemy action, that the would required treatment by military
medical personnel, and a record of this medical treatment must have been
made a matter of official record.

2.  Item 40 of the applicant's DA Form 20 is blank, which indicates he was
never wounded in action, and the PH is not included in the list of awards
contained in Item 41.  The applicant last audited the DA Form 20 on 5
November 1971, more than a year after he departed the RVN.  In effect, this
audit was his verification that the information contained on the DA Form
20, to include the Item 40 and Item 41 entries, was correct at that time.
The PH is also not included in the list of awards contained on the
applicant's DD Form 214, which he authenticated with his signature on the
date of his REFRAD.  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 it was prepared and issued.

3.  The applicant's record is also void of any orders or other documents
that show he was ever recommended for, or awarded the PH by proper
authority while serving on active duty.  Further, there are no medical
treatment records on file in his record that show he was ever treated for a
combat-related wound or injury, and his name is not included on the Vietnam
Casualty Roster, the official DA list of RVN battle casualties.

4.  Finally, although the SF 600 provided by the applicant shows he was
treated for a cut he received on 31 August 1970, this document provides no
information regarding how the cut was sustained and fails to indicate the
cut was received as a direct result of or was caused by enemy action.
Therefore, absent any
evidence of record that corroborates the applicant's claim that he was
wounded in action in the RVN, the regulatory burden of proof necessary to
support award of the PH has not been satisfied in this case.

5.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must
show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily
appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to
submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement related to award of the
PH.

6.  The evidence does show that based on his RVN service, the applicant is
entitled to the MUC, RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, and 4
bronze service stars for wear on his already-awarded VSM.  The omission of
these awards from his record is an administrative matter that does not
require Board action.  Therefore, the Case Management Support Division
(CMSD), St. Louis, Missouri, will correct his record as outlined in
paragraph 2 of the Board Determination/Recommendation section below.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__ENA __  __DLL __  __EMN __  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  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.  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, and 4 bronze
service stars for wear on his already-awarded Vietnam Service Medal; and by
providing him a correction to his DD Form 214 that includes these awards.




                                  _____Eric N. Andersen __
                                            CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20070007284                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2007/11/20                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1972/01/07                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |Early Separation                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY with Note                          |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Ms. Mitrano                             |
|ISSUES         1.  46   |107.0000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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