RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  5 February 2008
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070016073 


	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. Kenneth L. Wright

Chairperson

Mr. Antonio Uribe

Member

Mr. Ronald D. Gant

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 his finger was wounded by a machete during combat in the Republic of Vietnam and he received treatment in the form of fifteen stitches, therefore, he should be awarded the Purple Heart.

3.  The applicant provides no additional documentary evidence 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.  Records show the applicant had two separate terms of service on active duty. His first period of service was from 20 January 1965 through 5 February 1968 and his second period of service was from 2 June 1969 through 31 May 1972.

3.  The applicant's DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) for the period ending 5 February 1968 shows that he enlisted into the Army on 29 January 1965.  He completed basic and advanced individual training and was awarded the military occupational specialty of 76A (Supply Clerk).  On 20 June 1967, the applicant was awarded the military occupational specialty of 11D (Armor Intelligence Specialist).  The highest rank he achieved was private first class/pay grade E-3.

4.  Block 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant's DD Form 214 for the period ending 5 February 1968 does not show award of the Purple Heart.


5.  Block 31 (Foreign Service) of the applicant's DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) for his period of service ending on 5 February 1968 shows he served in the Republic of Vietnam during the period 20 August 1965 through 11 August 1966.  Block 40 (Wounds) is blank.  Block 41 (Awards and Decorations) does not show award of the Purple Heart.

6.  Block 38 (Record of Assignments) of the applicant's DA Form 20 shows he was a patient a the 7th Field Hospital for the period 15 December 1965 through 
21 January 1966.  DA Form 8-275-3 (Clinical Record Cover Sheet), dated 
16 January 1966, shows that he was admitted to the 7th Field Hospital to receive treatment for Malaria on 15 December 1965.

7.  Block 38 (Record of Assignments) of the applicant's DA Form 20 shows he was a patient assigned to the Medical Hold Detachment of the 249th General Hospital for the period 3 May 1966 through 10 August 1966.  The applicant's available medical records do not show the reason he was assigned to the Medical Hold Detachment for this period of time.

8.  The applicant's DD Form 214 for the period ending 31 May 1972 shows that he enlisted into the Army on 2 June 1969 as a prior service Soldier.  He was granted constructive credit for his prior completion of basic and advanced individual training and was awarded the military occupational specialty of 11D (Armor Intelligence Specialist).  The highest rank he achieved was specialist/pay grade E-4.

9.  Block 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant's DD Form 214 for the period ending 31 May 1972, does not show award of the Purple Heart.

10.  Block 31 (Foreign Service) of the applicant's DA Form 20 for his period of service ending on 31 May 1972 shows he served in Germany during the period 
7 June 1969 through 30 May 1972.  Block 40 (Wounds) is blank.  Block 41 (Awards and Decorations) does not show award of the Purple Heart.

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

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


13.  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.

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

15.  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 of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation based on Department of the Army General Orders Number 59, 
dated 1969.

16.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part, that the Presidential Unit Citation (known as the Distinguished Unit Citation until 3 November 1966) is awarded for extraordinary heroism in action.  A unit must display such gallantry, determination and esprit de corps in accomplishing its mission as would warrant award of the Distinguished Service Cross to an individual. 

17.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 shows the unit, to which the applicant was assigned while serving in the Republic of Vietnam,1st Battalion, 8th Cavalry Regiment, was awarded the Presidential Unit Citation based on Department of the Army General Orders Number 40, dated 1967.

18.  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.

19.  The applicant's records show he participated in three campaigns during his service in the Republic of Vietnam:  the Vietnam Defense Campaign, the Vietnam Counteroffensive, and the Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase II.


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.  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.

3.  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.

4.  General Orders awarded the applicant's unit the Presidential Unit Citation.  Therefore, he is entitled to have his records corrected to show this unit award.

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.  Records show the applicant participated in three campaigns during his service in the Republic of Vietnam.  Therefore, he is eligible for award of three bronze service stars to be affixed to his Vietnam Service Medal.

7.  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

_KLW___  _AU ____  _RDG___  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 Presidential Unit Citation, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation and three bronze service stars to be affixed to his already-awarded Vietnam Service Medal.




_Kenneth L. Wright___
          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.