BOARD DATE:	  3 February 2015 

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140010945 


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.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he has attempted to obtain approval for the Purple Heart from the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) without success.  He provided all available documents to support his request.  He has been unable to offer any medical documentation as he does not have access to these documents.

3.  The applicant provides:

* three letters showing correspondence with HRC
* one page from a Daily Staff Journal Duty Officer's Log
* three letters of support
* extracted page titled Rating Decision, apparently from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
* letter from the National Personnel Records Center with attachments (42 pages extracted from the applicant's personnel file)

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 was inducted into the Army of the United States on 11 May 1967.  After completing initial training, he was awarded military occupational specialty 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman).  The highest rank/grade held was sergeant/E-5.

3.  Item 31 (Foreign Service) of his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows he served in Vietnam from on or about 20 October 1967 to on or about 12 December 1968.  

4.  He was honorably released from active duty on 14 December 1968.  His DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge), as amended by his DD Form 215 (Correction of DD Form 214), does not show the Purple Heart.  

5.  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 shows he was wounded or injured as a result of hostile action.

	a.  Item 38 (Record of Assignments) of his DA Form 20 does not show he was placed into a "Patient" status at a medical treatment facility at any time during his period of service

	b.  Item 40 (Wounds) of his DA Form 20 is blank.  Army Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management System), chapter 9, stated a brief description of wounds or injuries (including injury from gas) requiring medical treatment received through hostile or enemy action, including those requiring hospitalization would be entered in item 40 of the DA Form 20.  This regulation further stated that the date the wound or injury occurred would also be placed in item 40.

	c.  Item 41 (Awards and Decorations) of his DA Form 20 does not show award of the Purple Heart.

	d. 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 procedure for injuries at the time.

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

	f.  A review of the Awards and Decorations Computer-Assisted Retrieval System (ADCARS), an index of general orders issued during the Vietnam era between 1965 and 1973 maintained by the U.S. Army Human Resources Command, failed to reveal any orders for the Purple Heart pertaining to the applicant.

6.  His record contains a Standard Form (SF) 89 (Report of Medical History).  In item 5 (Purpose of Examination) it states "Separation."  In item 20 (Have You Ever Had or Have You Now (then followed by a list of illnesses and medical conditions with the choice of checking either "YES" or "NO")) the "YES" block is checked for "History of Head Injury."  In item 39 (Physician's Summary and Elaboration of All Pertinent Data) it states "Shrapnel, scalp posteriorly, occ. local paresthesia (tingling or pricking sensation); all other existed prior to service (EPTS)."

7.  The applicant provides three letters of support which essentially state:

* the applicant was assigned to Company D, 2nd Battalion, 8th Cavalry Regiment when, on or about 7 April 1968, he tripped a booby trap
* the applicant and another Soldier were wounded
* the applicant received serious fragment wounds to the head, neck, back, buttocks, and legs
* he was medically evacuated to receive treatment

8.  He provides a document titled Daily Staff Journal - Duty Officer's Log, dated 7 April 1968.  One of the entries states at 1600 hours the applicant's unit requested medical evacuation because two enlisted Soldiers had been wounded by a booby trap.  No names are identified in this entry.

9.  He provides a document titled Rating Decision, dated 13 July 1971, which appears to be from VA.  On the document it essentially states:

* the applicant made a claim for service-connection for shrapnel wounds
* available medical records did not show any treatment for shrapnel wounds but his separation physical makes reference to "shrapnel scalp, posteriorly, occasional local paresthesia
* although evidence is not conclusive, the Rating Board gave him the benefit of the doubt

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides that the Purple Heart is awarded for a wound sustained while in action against and 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.  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

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  With respect to the applicant's request for the award of the Purple Heart, he contends:

* he was wounded as a result of a booby trap blast during his deployment in Vietnam
* he was medically evacuated for treatment

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

3.  The applicant's service record is void of any documentary evidence showing he was wounded or injured as a result of combat.  He offers:

* three letters of support from witnesses, none of whom are the medical personnel who might have treated him
* an entry on a Staff Duty Journal which notes two Soldiers were medically evacuated as a result of a booby trap explosion, but no names of the injured are shown
* a VA Rating Decision which noted the absence of evidence of medical treatment for wounds the applicant contends he sustained, but gave the applicant the benefit of the doubt

4.  For the Purple Heart to be awarded, the preponderance of the evidence must clearly show not only a wound's existence, but that it directly resulted from hostile action, was treated by medical personnel, and a record of this treatment exists.  Neither the record nor the evidence offered by the applicant fulfills these criteria.

5.  The applicant's contention and sincerity are not in question.  However, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis for awarding him the Purple Heart.  Based upon the foregoing, the requested relief is unable to be granted.

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)                                         AR20140010945





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140010945



5


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1