RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  20 November 2003
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2003086684

	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.  

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Ms. Joyce A. Wright		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Joann Langston		Chairperson	
	Ms. Linda D. Simmons		Member	
	Mr. Robert Duecaster		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	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 that his DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or Discharge), dated 30 September 1972 be corrected to show that he was awarded the Purple Heart. 

2.  The applicant states that his DD Form 214, dated 30 September 1972 does not show the Purple Heart.  However, it is listed in item 41 (Awards and Decorations) of his DA Form 20 (Personnel Qualification Record).  

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DA Form 214, dated 30 September 1972 and a copy of his DA Form 20.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of error which occurred on 30 September 1972.  The application submitted in this case is dated 23 January 2003.  

2.  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 allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file within the 3-year statute of limitation if the ABCMR determines that it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  The applicant military records show that he was enlisted on 4 September 1952.  He served in Vietnam from 3 May 1967 to 2 May 1968 and from 29 October 1968 to 9 April 1970.  He continued to serve until he was placed on the Army of the United States Retired List on 30 September 1972, in the pay grade of SSG/E-6. 

4.  The applicant’s DD Form 214, dated 30 September 1972, shows he was awarded the Army Commendation Medal (1st Oak Leaf Cluster), the Good Conduct Medal 2nd award, and the Vietnam Service Medal with one bronze service star.  His DD Form 214, dated 30 September 1972 does not show the Purple Heart as an authorized award.  

5.  Item 40 of his DA Form 20 shows the entry "Fragment wound fr (from) 107 mm (millimeter) Rocket to right arm 29Dec68 (29 December 1968)."  Item 41 shows the entry "PH AR 672-5-1 YES."

6.  The applicant's records contain a copy of a telegram from The Adjutant General (TAG) of the Army, dated 31 December 1968, which shows he was slightly wounded in Vietnam on 29 December 1968 as a result of hostile action.  He received fragment wounds to the right arm.  

7.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 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, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.

8.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) lists the unit awards received by units serving in Vietnam.  This document shows that, at the time of the applicant's assignment to the 229th Supply and Service Company, it was cited for award of the Meritorious Unit Commendation by Department of the Army General Orders Number 39, dated 1970.  

9.  The same register also shows that, at the time of the applicant's assignment to the 716th Military Police Battalion, the unit was cited for award of the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation by Department of the Army General Orders 6, 1973.  It further shows that the applicant is entitled to award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation based on Department of the Army General Orders Number 8, dated 1974.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Based on the evidence in this case, the applicant is entitled to correction of his records to show awards which were omitted through administrative error at the time the applicant was separated from active duty.

2.  The evidence of record shows that the applicant was slightly wounded in Vietnam on 29 December 1968 as a result of hostile action.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his records to show the award of the Purple Heart.

3.  The applicant’s unit was awarded the Meritorious Unit Commendation, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, and Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation during his tenure of assignment. Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his records to show these awards.

BOARD VOTE:

__jl___  __ls___  ___rd_____  GRANT RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief and to excuse failure to timely file.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing that he was awarded the Purple Heart, the 
Meritorious Unit Commendation, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, and Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation.

		__Joann Langston_____
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003086684	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20031120	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19720930	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR  635-200 CHAP 12/RETIREMENT	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	61	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.