RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  7 February 2008 
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070015904 


	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.  Rial D. Coleman

Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:


Mr. William D. Powers

Chairperson

Ms. Rose M. Lys

Member

Mr. Qawiy A. Sabree

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 should be awarded the Purple Heart based upon the facts that his left eye and forehead were injured as the result of shrapnel from a mortar shell and that he had an appendectomy in the Republic of Vietnam.  The applicant continues that he was not previously awarded the Purple Heart due to administrative errors on the part of the attending field medic and the hospital that maintained his medical records.  The applicant concludes that he has been attempting to rectify this oversight since he discovered the discrepancy on 23 September 1969.

3.  The applicant provides a Standard Form 89 (Report of Medical History) as additional documentary evidence in support of this 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 DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) for the period ending 8 September 1969 shows that he enlisted into the Army on 23 August 1966.  He completed basic and advanced individual training and was awarded the military occupational specialty of 36K (Wireman).  The applicant also served in the military occupational specialties of 17E (Field Illumination Specialist), 95B (Military Policeman), and 95C (Corrections Specialist).  The highest temporary rank he achieved was sergeant/pay grade E-5.  The highest permanent rank he achieved was specialist/pay grade E-4.


3.  The applicant provides a Standard Form 89, dated 2 June 1969, which documented the physical examination he underwent in conjunction with the expiration of his term of service.  Item 39 (Physician's Summary and Explanation of all Pertinent Data) of this form shows the following entries:  Laceration forehead RVN, Skin infection of hands, Penicillin allergy and horse serum, and Fracture left leg no segmentation.

4.  Block 31 (Foreign Service) of the applicant's DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) for his period of service ending on 8 September 1969 shows he served in the Republic of Vietnam during the period 17 December 1967 through 16 December 1968.  Block 40 (Wounds) is blank.  Block 
41 (Awards and Decorations) does not show award of the Purple Heart.

5.  Block 38 (Record of Assignments) of the applicant's DA Form 20 does not show that he was ever in a patient status.

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

7.  There are no orders in the available records which show the applicant was awarded the Purple Heart.

8.  Block 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant's DD Form 214 for the period ending 8 September 1969 does not show award of the Purple Heart.

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) 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.

10.  Review of the applicant's record indicates entitlement to additional awards and decorations that are not shown on his DD Form 214.

11.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) lists the unit awards received by units serving in the Republic of Vietnam.  This document shows the unit, to which the applicant was assigned, was awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation based on Department of the Army General Orders Number 59, 
dated 1969.
12.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 shows the unit, to which the applicant was assigned while serving in the Republic of Vietnam, 5th Battalion, 2d Artillery Regiment, was awarded the Meritorious Unit Commendation based on Department of the Army General Orders Number 17, dated 1968.

13.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 shows the unit, to which the applicant was assigned while serving in the Republic of Vietnam, Battery I, 29th Artillery Regiment, was awarded the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class based on Department of the Army General Orders Number 51, dated 1971.

14.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards), in pertinent part, authorizes award of a bronze service star, based on qualifying service, for each campaign listed in Appendix B of this regulation and states that authorized bronze service stars will be worn on the appropriate service medal.  This regulation also provides, in pertinent part, that a silver service star is authorized in lieu of five bronze service stars.

15.  The applicant's records show he participated in five campaigns during his service in the Republic of Vietnam:  Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase III, TET Counteroffensive, Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase IV, Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase V, and Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase VI.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that he was wounded in the Republic of Vietnam and should be awarded the Purple Heart was carefully considered.

2.  Although a head laceration is listed in the applicant's medical history on his separation physical, there is no indication of how he sustained the injury.

3.  There are no general orders that show the applicant was awarded the Purple Heart.  Evidence of record does not show the applicant was wounded as a result of hostile action or treated for such wounds.  The applicant's name does not appear on the Vietnam Casualty Roster.

4.  In the absence of evidence that the applicant was wounded or injured as a result of hostile action and treated for those wounds, there is insufficient evidence upon which to base award of the Purple Heart in this case.

5.  General Orders awarded the applicant’s unit the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation.  Therefore, the applicant is entitled to have his records corrected to show this foreign unit award.

6.  General Orders awarded the applicant's unit the Meritorious Unit Commendation.  Therefore, he is entitled to have his records corrected to show this unit award.

7.  General Orders awarded the applicant’s unit the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation.  Therefore, the applicant is entitled to have his records corrected to show this foreign unit award.

8.  Records show the applicant participated in five campaigns during his service in the Republic of Vietnam.  Therefore, he is eligible for award of one silver service star to be affixed to his already-awarded Vietnam Service Medal.

9.  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 2 of the BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION section below.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

_QAS_ __  _RML___  __WDP__  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 he was awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, Meritorious Unit Commendation, the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation, and one silver service star to be affixed to his already-awarded Vietnam Service Medal.




___William D. Powers___
          CHAIRPERSON


INDEX

CASE ID
AR
SUFFIX

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

BOARD DECISION
(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.