BOARD DATE:	  20 January 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100019143 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests the Purple Heart (PH) be added to his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge).  

2.  The applicant states he was awarded the PH and it is not shown on his 
DD Form 214.  

3.  The applicant provides a self-authored statement, news article, and photographs in support of his application.  The applicant refers to Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) medical records but they were not included with the 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 he enlisted in the Regular Army on 
16 November 1966.  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 36C (Lineman), and specialist four (SP4)/E-4 is the highest rank he attained while serving on active duty.  

3.  The applicant’s DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows he served in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) from 28 February 1968 through on or about    12 February 1969.  

4.  Item 38 (Record of Assignments) of the applicant's DA Form 20 shows that during his RVN tour he was assigned to Company A, 13th Signal Battalion,
1st Cavalry Division, performing duties in MOS 36C as a lineman.  It further shows that on 12 June 1968 he entered a patient status and was hospitalized in the Theater.  He remained in this status until 18 July 1968, at which time he returned to duty with his RVN unit.  His record is void of medical treatment records or other documents explaining the reason for his hospitalization.  

5.  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 his DA Form 20 on 17 October 1968.  

6.  The applicant’s record is void of any medical treatment records showing he was wounded in action, or orders, or other documents that show he was recommended for or awarded the PH by proper authority while serving in the RVN.  

7.  On 12 February 1969, the applicant was honorably released from active duty, in the rank of SP4/E-4, after completing 2 years, 2 months, and 27 days of active military service.  The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time shows he earned the following awards in item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized):

* National Defense Service Medal
* RVN Campaign Medal with 60 Device
* Vietnam Service Medal 
* Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar  

8.  The applicant provides photographs that show a Soldier receiving an award and a Soldier holding a certificate and medal.  He also provides photographs showing an individual who is hospitalized and an individual with his right arm in what appears to be a soft cast. 



9.  The applicant also provides a news article that appears to be from the Los Angeles Herald-Examiner, dated 21 May 1968.  The article recounts enemy attacks at four United States bases, which includes a rocket attack at the 1st Cavalry Headquarters camp which the applicant underlined.  He further provides a self-authored statement in which he indicated the VA stated his records show he was recommended for the PH; however, he fails to provide records confirming this.

10.  During the processing of this case, a member of the Board's staff reviewed the Department of the Army (DA) Vietnam casualty roster.  The applicant's name was not included on the roster.

11.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides the Army's awards policy.  Paragraph 2-8 contains guidance on the PH.  It states the PH is awarded to members wounded in action.  It also states in order to award the PH there must be evidence of the wound for which the award is being made was received as a result of enemy action, the wound required treatment by military medical personnel, and a record of the medical treatment was made a matter of official record.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention he should be awarded the PH has been carefully considered.  However, the evidence of record and independent evidence submitted by the applicant fails to support this claim.

2.  By regulation, in order to support award of the PH the member must have been wounded in action and there must be evidence the wound for which the award is being made was received as a result of enemy action, the wound must have required medical treatment by military medical personnel, and this medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.

3.  The information provided by the applicant seems to indicate he was hospitalized and awarded the PH.  However, the applicant’s record is void of entries or documents that indicate he was treated for wounds received as a result of enemy action or that he was recommended for or awarded the PH by proper authority while serving on active duty. 

4.  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 item 41 of his DA Form 20.  The applicant last audited the DA Form 20 on 19 October 1968, more than 4 months after he was hospitalized.  

5.  Further, there is no indication the applicant ever attempted to have the PH added to his record and/or DD Form 214 while he remained on active duty or at the time of his separation processing.  

6.  Absent any evidence of record corroborating the applicant's claim that he was wounded as a result of enemy action or medical treatment records confirming he was treated for a combat-related wound and/or awarded the PH by proper authority, the regulatory burden of proof necessary to support award of the PH has not been satisfied in this case.  

7.  The applicant and all others concerned should know this action related to award of the PH in no way diminishes the sacrifices made by him in service to our Nation.  The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of his service in arms.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___x__  ___x_____  ___x_____  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

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.




      _______ _ x  _______   ___
               CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100019143



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100019143



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1