IN THE CASE OF:	   

		BOARD DATE:	  4 February 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130009925 


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:

* award of the Purple Heart for a combat wound in Vietnam in 1964
* award of the Purple Heart for a combat wound in Vietnam in 1969
* award of the Purple Heat for a punji stick combat injury in Vietnam
* award of the Amphibious Landing Medal (i.e., the Arrowhead Device)

2.  The applicant states:

	a.  He sustained a combat wound in Vietnam in 1964.  There are no medical records available.  There were no American medical services in the field in the 1964/1965 timeframe at the Vietnam Delta.  His radio operator stepped on a booby trap that exploded and caused him (the applicant) to receive numerous fragments to his right leg and left forearm.  Two fragments were cast-iron size of a bb and eight fragments were similar in size to grains of sand.  He was treated by a Vietnamese medic.  After 2 weeks, the festered wounds expelled the fragments and the wounds healed.  Had U.S. medical support been available, there would have been a record of treatment and a recommendation for the Purple Heart.  There have probably been some residual viruses and consequential damage since his foot and leg developed significant problems which the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has determined were caused by combat.  Extensive research yielded no medical records.  

	b.  He sustained a combat wound in Vietnam in 1969.  There was no field medic deployed to Tong Le Chon Special Forces camp.  He served there during a 3-week operation where he was assigned the duties of team leader.  A large rocket landed close behind him as he ran for a bunker.  The explosion blew him into an entry crossbeam head first.  He suffered a serious concussion and blast concussion damage to his right side.  He was stitched by a Special Forces medic.  He returned to headquarters 2 weeks later and he received the Presidential Unit Citation.  Had U.S. medical support been available, there would have been a record of the treatment and a recommendation for the Purple Heart. There has been extensive consequential joint and bone damage which has developed to the right side.  His hearing, sight, joints, and other parts have been evaluated by the VA and have been found to have been caused by a combat explosive injury.  The left side has minor injuries.  There were no medical records at the time.  A Purple Heart would justify his combat story and complaints.  There may be classified records pertaining to the operation.  The Board can contact the VA and examine the VA records. 

	c.  There are no medical records supporting his combat injury by a punji stick that pierced his right heel above the ankle during combat operations near Be Ke, Vinh Long, IV Corps.  He served as a senior advisor, 3rd Battalion, 13th Vietnamese Infantry Regiment, 9th Army of Vietnam Division, on 21 November 1964.  The heavy sand road across the rice paddies had "H" type cut-out punji stake pits with the center-path 2 feet wide to support 80-pound people.  He weighed 150 pounds.  It collapsed and he fell in along the side.  A 24-inch stake pierced his foot.   There was no medical evacuation available.  There is no record of a Purple Heart.  The injury has become disabling.  There are no medical records that exist.  He is currently 100 percent disabled due to a combat injury.  VA benefits for his wife depend on the correction of his records, including the award of the Purple Heart.  

	d.  He conducted an amphibious landing with the Vietnamese 3rd Battalion, 19th Regiment, 9th Army of Vietnam Division, in the Delta in 1965.  They loaded the battalion on 5 Landing Craft Infantry at Vinh Long between the Mekong and the Basic Rivers for a combat landing in the Plains of Reeds, about 5 kilometers from the Cambodian border.  Their U.S. fire support vessels were from the U.S. Navy Meverkord's tugboat-gunship delta flotilla, command ship; and the Dominque.  The landing was lightly opposed by small arms fire but shortly afterward a Cambodian gunboat left the border and came into their landing zone, firing a .51 caliber machinegun and 30mm rapid fire cannon at them.  As it approached the landing zone it became more accurate, and he asked a covering pilot to help.  He fired his only rocket and sank the enemy gunboat.

3.  The applicant provides

* hand-written entries on a piece of paper
* Officer Evaluation Report, 2 November 1964 to 5 March 1965
* DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)
* two photographs of a foot with numbers, circles, and words
* photograph of two Soldiers 
* photograph of a Soldier rendering a salute
* photograph of a boat
* a medical form 

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 available records show he was a U.S. Military Academy graduate and he was appointed as a Reserve commissioned officer of the Army and entered active duty on 4 June 1958.

3.  He served in a variety of stateside or overseas assignments, as indicated below, and he attained the rank of colonel (COL):

* Germany, 20 December 1958 to 26 July 1962
* Vietnam, 24 October 1964 to 6 October 1965; he was assigned to the U.S. Military Assistance Command
* Vietnam, 28 February 1968 to 26 July 1969; he was assigned to Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 1st Infantry Division
* Germany, from 19 August 1972 to 10 June 1976

4.  He retired on 31 August 1980 and he was placed on the Retired List in his retired grade of COL on 1 September 1980.  

5.  He provides: 

	a.  A piece of paper with hand-written entries pertaining to what appears to be an after-action review of a military operation.
	b.  An Officer Evaluation Report for the rating period 2 November 1964 through 5 March 1965, confirming his assignment as a Senior Advisor to the 3rd Battalion, 13th Infantry Regiment, 9th Infantry Division.  Nothing is mentioned regarding a combat wound or injury. 

	c.  A photograph of a foot with numbers and circles, and the words "Booby trap fragment wounds" and a second photograph of a foot, also with numbers and circles, and the words "Punji stake, entrance wound."  

	d.  A photograph of two Soldiers.  

	e.  A photograph of a boat. 

	f.  A photograph of a Soldier rendering a salute. 

	g.  A medical form that appears to be a Standard Form 600 (Chronological Record of Medical Care) with no name, social security number, or identifying information.  The form lists treatment of an individual on 16 December 1968 for a laceration on the right hand.   

6.  There is no evidence of record that shows he was injured or wounded as a result of hostile action or that he was awarded the Purple Heart.  Nothing in several typical sources show he was wounded or injured as a result of hostile action.

	a.  His medical records, specifically his records of treatment, are not available for review with this case.

	b.  His personnel records do not contain an official Army message or a Western Union telegram notifying his next of kin of an injury or wound sustained in action.  This was the proper notification of injuries at the time.

	c.  His name is not shown on the Vietnam casualty listing.  This is a listing of Vietnam era casualties commonly is used to verify entitlement to award of the Purple Heart.

	d.  His contemporaneous DA Form 66 (Officer Qualification Record) is not available for review with this case.  A subsequent DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) and a subsequent Officer Record Brief do not list the Purple Heart or any injuries, medical restrictions, or profiles. 

	e.  A review of the Awards and Decorations Computer Assisted Retrieval System maintained by the U.S. Army Human Resources Command Military Awards Branch, which is an index of general orders issued during the Vietnam era between 1965 and 1973, failed to reveal any orders for the Purple Heart pertaining to him.

7.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides that the Purple Heart is awarded for a wound sustained while in action against an enemy or 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 medical personnel, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record:

	a.  Examples of enemy-related injuries which clearly justify award of the Purple Heart are as follows:  injury caused by enemy bullet, shrapnel, or other projectile created by enemy action; injury caused by enemy placed mine or trap; injury caused by enemy released chemical, biological, or nuclear agent; injury caused by vehicle or aircraft accident resulting from enemy fire; and/or concussion injuries caused as a result of enemy generated explosions.

	b.  Examples of injuries or wounds which clearly do not justify award of the Purple Heart are as follows:  frostbite or trench foot injuries; heat stroke; food poisoning not caused by enemy agents; chemical, biological, or nuclear agents not released by the enemy; battle fatigue; disease not directly caused by enemy agents; accidents, to include explosive, aircraft, vehicular, and other accidental wounding not related to or caused by enemy action; self-inflicted wounds, except when in the heat of battle and not involving gross negligence; post-traumatic stress disorders; and/or jump injuries not caused by enemy action.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides for award of the Arrowhead Device with certain awards.  The arrowhead is a bronze replica of an Indian arrowhead that denotes participation in a combat parachute jump, helicopter assault landing, combat glider landing, or amphibious assault landing, while assigned or attached as a member of an organized force carrying out an assigned tactical mission.  A Soldier must actually exit the aircraft or watercraft, as appropriate, to receive assault credit.  Individual assault credit is tied directly to the combat assault credit decision (see paragraph 7–23) for the unit to which the Soldier is attached or assigned at the time of the assault.  Should a unit be denied assault credit, no assault credit will accrue to the individual Soldiers of that unit.  It is worn on the service and suspension ribbons of the Asiatic-Pacific Campaign, European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign, Korean Service Medal, Vietnam Service Medal, and Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal.  Only one arrowhead will be worn on any ribbon.

9.  Paragraph 7-23 of Army Regulation 600-8-22 states assault landing credit (award of the bronze arrowhead) may be made to units of the Army who, in the combat zone of a battle, campaign, or expedition as established by Joint Chiefs of Staff or Department of the Army (DA), accomplishes one of the following types of assault operations: 

	a.  Makes a parachute jump into enemy-held territory as a part of an organized force carrying out an assigned tactical mission; participates in the assault waves of an amphibious landing on enemy-held territory; or makes a helicopter assault landing into enemy-held territory as a part of an organizational force carrying out an assigned tactical mission

	b.  The assault operation will be of such scope as to warrant DA designation as a battle or campaign and be of such magnitude as to include tactical elements of at least one other Service.  The forces committed should be spearheading a major assault into enemy controlled territory.  The operation will be such that the committed forces will ultimately control the area in which they have landed and not rely on immediate link-up with other forces or extrication after a hit-and-run type of mission.  Day-to-day combat assault type missions in an already established combat zone do not qualify for award of the arrowhead device.  For the individual Soldier to receive award of the arrowhead, the Soldier must physically exit the aircraft or watercraft during the assault landing.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends he should be awarded three awards of the Purple Heart and the Arrowhead Device (there is no such thing as the Amphibious Landing Medal).

2.  With respect to the Purple Heart: 

	a.  The criteria for award of the Purple Heart require the submission of substantiating evidence to verify the injury/wound was the result of hostile action, the injury or wound must have required medical treatment by medical personnel, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.

	b.  Unfortunately, the applicant's service record is void of any evidence that he was wounded or injured as a result of enemy action.  His name is not listed on the Vietnam casualty listing.  His medical records are not available for review with this case.  There is nothing in multiple typical sources that confirm he was wounded as a result of hostile action or that he required treatment by medical personnel.
	c.  The applicant's contention and sincerity are not in question.  However, in the absence of documentation that conclusively shows he was wounded or injured as a result of enemy action and treated for those wounds, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis for awarding him the Purple Heart. 

3.  With respect to the Arrowhead Device, there is no evidence in the applicant's available records and he provides none to show he physically exited an aircraft or a watercraft during an assault landing.  In order to be awarded this device with the Vietnam Service Medal or the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, he must show conclusive evidence that he made a parachute jump into enemy-held territory as a part of an organized force carrying out an assigned tactical mission; or participated in the assault waves of an amphibious landing on enemy-held territory; or made a helicopter assault landing into enemy-held territory as a part of an organizational force carrying out an assigned tactical mission.  

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___x____  ____x___  ____x___  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 wants the applicant and all others concerned to know this action 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.



      ____________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)                                         AR20130009925





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130009925



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1