RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  11 December 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070009558 


	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

Ms. Jeanne Marie Rowan

Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:


Mr. William Powers

Chairperson

Mr. Michael Flynn

Member

Ms. Sherry Stone

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 award of the Purple Heart.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he has competent evidence to support his request for award of the Purple Heart.  

3.  The applicant provides five personal letters from military acquaintances, his Veterans Services Officer (VSO), and his two daughters in support of his application. 

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The Board originally considered the applicant’s request for award of a Purple Heart on 27 May 1998 in docket number AC98-07289.  However, an authenticated copy of those proceedings cannot be located.  As such, the Board will do a new review of the applicant’s request.

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 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.

3.   The applicant's military records show he was inducted into the Army of the United States on 23 June 1970.  He successfully completed basic combat and advanced individual training and was awarded the military occupational specialty 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman).  The highest rank he attained while serving on active duty was specialist four/pay grade E4.

4.  The applicant was assigned to Company D, 2nd Battalion, 8th Cavalry, 3rd Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division in the Republic of Vietnam during the period from 14 December 1970 to on or about 2 December 1971.

5.  Item 40 (Wounds) of the applicant's DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) does not contain any entries indicating that the applicant received any wounds.  

6.  Item 41 (Awards and Decorations) of the applicant's DA Form 20 does not show the award of the Purple Heart.

7.  On 4 February 1972, the applicant early released from active duty and transferred to the United States Army Reserve Control Group (Annual Training). He had completed 1 year, 7 months, and 12 days of net active federal service that was characterized as honorable.  

8.  Item 26 (Decorations, Medal, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant's DD Form 214 with an effective date of 4 February 1972, which he authenticated in his own handwriting, does not show the award of the Purple Heart. 

9.  There are no general orders in the applicant's military service records awarding him the Purple Heart.

10.  The applicant's name does not appear on the Vietnam Casualty Roster.

11.  There are no military medical records available for the Board to review in support of his application.

12.  The applicant provided a self-authored statement, which states, in pertinent part, that he was glad he survived his ordeal in Vietnam and that he received all his medals except for the Purple Heart, which he believes he is eligible for based on wounds he received while engaged with hostile forces.  He states his forearm was wounded and that he presently has identifying shrapnel scars.  He sought treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder in 1996 and states that the scar on his forearm still reminds him of the war and his personal experiences.  He further states, in effect, that awarding him the Purple Heart will assist him in the healing process.

13.  The applicant provided three letters from military acquaintances.  

	a.  His commanding officer in a letter dated 23 January 2006 states, in effect, that the company was continuously engaged in combat operations in the vicinity of Long Khanh Province in the Republic of Vietnam and that the applicant served honorably and courageously in his unit.  

	b.  His platoon leader in a letter dated 22 August 2005 states, in effect, that their entire tour of duty was spent in the dense jungle.  The unit was an airmobile infantry platoon participating in over seventy combat assaults and extractions by helicopter.  He states the applicant never left the field of operation and that he served honorably and with distinction.  

	c.  A copy of a letter from the battalion commander dated 17 July 1997, which outlines, in effect, the combat operational history of Company D, 2nd Battalion, 8th Cavalry during the period 20 through 22 April 1971.  The letter specifically identifies the names of the organization’s leaders, but it does not contain names of all unit members nor does it contain a by-name roster of the men wounded in action.  During this three-day period, the applicant's unit was heavily engaged in assault combat operations against the enemy, to include attempting to extract a significant number of Soldiers from a sister company who were killed in action while in their lightly fortified defensive positions. 

14.  The applicant's two adult daughters each wrote a separate letter dated in March 2007.  The letters state, in pertinent part, that their father is an honorable and devoted Veteran who served valiantly during combat operations in the Republic of Vietnam.  The daughters further state, in effect, that shrapnel wounded their father's forearm during heavy combat and that he could not stop and seek medical attention for his wound at the time he was injured.  They have researched The Order of the Purple Heart for Military Merit and believe that their father is eligible and that he deserves this award as he has the physical scars that prove he was wounded in combat.  

15.  The applicant submitted a statement from two separate veterans services counselors in support of his application dated 8 June 2005 and 2 August 2005.  The counselors state, in effect, that the applicant is receiving treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder.  They also state the symptoms of the disorder are present in his thought process, his mood, diet, and sleep patterns.   

16.  The applicant's records show that he is entitled to an additional award, which he did not request and is not listed on his DD Form 214.

17.  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 by military medical personnel, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.  This regulation also provides that there is no statute of limitations on requests for award of the Purple Heart.
18.  The applicant's military service records do not contain orders for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.  There is no evidence the applicant received the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.  There also is no evidence the applicant was disqualified by his chain of command from receiving the Army Good Conduct Medal.  Records do not show indiscipline or lost time.  His records do not contain any adverse information and he received conduct and efficiency ratings of "excellent" throughout his service.

19.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 states, in pertinent part, that the Army Good Conduct Medal is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency and fidelity during a qualifying period of active duty enlisted service.  After 27 June 1950, to the present time, the current standard for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal is 3 years of qualifying service, but as little as one year is required for the first award in those cases when the period of service ends with the termination of Federal military service.  Although there is, no automatic entitlement to the Army Good Conduct Medal disqualification must be justified.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that he was wounded in the Republic of Vietnam and that he is entitled to award of the Purple Heart.  The applicant's military personnel records do not contain orders awarding the Purple Heart nor does his DD Form 20 contain any entry showing he was wounded or that he was awarded the Purple Heart.  His name is not listed on the Vietnam Casualty Roster nor do his military medical records contain any entry to show he was wounded and that he received medical treatment for wounds sustained as a result of hostile fire.  The witness statements he provided do not state in specific detail how he was injured, if hostile enemy forces caused the injury or that the former officers who wrote the statements were actually present when the applicant was wounded.  In the absence of supporting medical documents and other pertinent substantiating evidence, there is insufficient evidence upon which to base award of the Purple Heart.

2.  Based on the applicant's commander's determination that the applicant was fully qualified for reenlistment and in the absence of evidence showing disqualification, the applicant is entitled to the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal based on completion of qualifying service from 23 June 1970 to 4 February 1972 ending with termination of a period of Federal military service. 



BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

__WP___  __MF ___  ___SS __  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing the award Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award) for the period
23 June 1970 to 4 February 1972.

2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to the Purple Heart.

3.  The Board wants the applicant and all others concerned to know that this action in no way diminishes the sacrifices made by the applicant in service to our Nation.  The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of his service in arms.




____   William Powers________
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20070009558
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
20071211
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE
YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR . . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
PARTIAL GRANT 
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.
107.005
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.