IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080007231 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, in effect, the Purple Heart (PH) award. 2. The applicant states, in effect, that he believes that he is entitled to the PH because he is suffering from and has been diagnosed with chronic Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) which was sustained as a direct result of combat with enemy forces during Operation Desert Storm in 1991. He adds in effect, that he suffers from flashback, severe panic attacks, with secondary diagnoses of agoraphobia, and anxiety disorder. He is also very paranoid of everything and everyone in his life and lives in a state of almost total detachment from friends and family. These items have caused him to become very depressed and have overwhelming feelings of guilt. The symptoms started slowly after Thanksgiving in 1998 and now he is almost a total recluse who panics at the thought of having to leave his own home. The medication that his psychiatrist prescribed has done little to help. He understands that according to AR 600-8-22, PTSD does not fall into the category of injuries that entitles a Soldier to receive the PH, but neither were cold weather injuries prior to the injuries of Soldiers that served in the Korean War. PTSD is a debilitating injury and Soldiers who suffers from this should be entitled to the award of the PH. AR 600-8-22, para 2-8, states that it is not intended that such a strict interpretation of the requirement for the wound or injury to be caused by direct result of hostile action be taken that it would preclude the award being made to deserving personnel. Commanders must also take into consideration the circumstances surrounding the injury. That is why he is asking that the Board take in the full picture of what happened to him in the desert those 4 days and determine that denying his entitlement to the PH would be unjust. The applicant finally states, that he is receiving 100% disability from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), and he is also drawing Social Security Benefits as a result of his inability to gain employment due to the same disability. 3. The applicant provides a self-authored letter, a copy of his rating decision from (VA) and two award certificates. 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 complete military records are not available to the Board for review. However, there were sufficient documents remaining in his record for the Board to conduct a fair and impartial review of this case. 3. The applicant’s available record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 10 November 1981, after serving 4 years and 1 day of honorable service in the U.S. Marine Corps. He was trained in, awarded, and served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 18E (Special Operations Communications Sergeant). The highest grade he attained was pay grade E-6. 4. The applicant’s record also shows that during his active duty tenure, he earned the Combat Infantryman Badge, the Army Commendation Medal, the Army Achievement Medal with 1 oak leaf cluster, the Army Good Conduct Medal (3rd Award), the Kuwait Liberation Medal - Saudi Arabia, the Army Service Ribbon, the National Defense Service Medal, the Humanitarian Service Medal, the Southwest Asia Service Medal with 2 bronze service stars, the Noncommissioned Officer Professional Development Ribbon with Numeral 2, the Overseas Service Ribbon with Numeral 2, the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle (M-16) Rifle, the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Grenade Bar, the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Pistol (9 MM) Bar, the Air Assault Badge, the Parachutist Badge, and the Special Forces Tab. 5. On 24 August 1990, while deployed to an Air Force Base in Spain, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment for disobeying a lawful order by wrongfully consuming alcohol; for assaulting an Airman First Class by grabbing him from the rear; and for being drunk and disorderly, which conduct was of a nature to bring discredit upon the Armed Forces. His imposed punishment was a reduction to pay grade E-5; a forfeiture of $683.00 pay; admonition; an oral reprimand; 45 days restriction (suspended for 6 months); and 45 days extra duty. 6. On an unknown date, the applicant was informed that he would be separated under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-8 (Reduction in Strength – Qualitative Early Transition Program). 7. On 30 September 1992, the applicant was honorably discharged under the provisions of paragraph 16-8, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of Reduction in Authorized Strength-Qualitative Early Transition Program. The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time confirms that he had completed a total of 14 years, 10 months and 22 days of active military service; 1 year, 2 months, and 24 days of inactive military service and held the pay grade of E-6. There were no military records on file or provided by the applicant, that confirms he engaged in combat or received injuries from enemy action during Operations Desert Shield/Desert Storm. 8. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations) provides the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Paragraph 16-8 of this regulation sets forth the requirements for early separation of enlisted personnel due to reduction in force, strength limitations, or budgetary constraints. The service of personnel separated under this paragraph will be characterized as honorable. 9. The applicant provides a copy of a VA Rating Decision, dated 26 June 2006. This document indicates that the applicant was granted a service-connected disability rating of 70 percent for PTSD with panic disorder and agoraphobia. This document states that the applicant has PTSD and that the circumstances under which the applicant received the PTSD were as the applicant presented at the time. 10. 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 medical personnel, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record. 11. Army Regulation 600-45 (Decorations), which governed the award of Army decorations until 23 August 1951, stated that for the purpose of considering an award of the Purple Heart, a “wound” is defined as an injury to any part of the body from an outside force, element, or agent sustained while in action in the face of the armed enemy or as a result of a hostile act of such enemy. An “element” pertains to weather and the award of this decoration to personnel who were severely frostbitten while actually engaged in combat is authorized. 12. Award of the PH for frostbite injuries is currently prohibited; however, until 1951, Army Regulation 600-45, which governed the award of Army decorations, defined a “wound” as an injury to any part of the body from an outside force, element, or agent sustained while in action against an armed enemy or as a result of a hostile act of such enemy. An “element” was further defined as weather and the award of the PH to personnel who were severely frostbitten while actually engaged in combat was authorized. 13. PTSD, an anxiety disorder, was recognized as a psychiatric disorder in 1980 with the publishing of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), and is described in pages 424 through 429 of the current DSM. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant’s contentions that he is entitled to the award of the Purple Heart because he has been diagnosed and is suffering from PTSD, that he states was sustained as a direct result of combat with enemy forces during Operation Desert Storm in 1991, was carefully considered and found to be without merit. There were no military records on file or provided by the applicant, that confirms that he engaged in combat or received injuries from enemy action during Operations Desert Shield/Desert Shield. 2. The regulation states, in order to support award of the PH, there must be evidence that the wound for which the award is being made was received as a result of hostile action, that it required treatment by military medical personnel, and a record of this treatment must have been made a matter of official record. There is no evidence and the applicant has not provided any evidence that shows that he met any of the requirements which would entitle him the award of the Purple Heart. 3. For the purpose of considering an award of the Purple Heart, a “wound” is defined as an injury to any part of the body from an outside force, element, or agent sustained while in action in the face of the armed enemy or as a result of a hostile act of such enemy. An “element” pertains to weather and the award of this decoration to personnel who were severely frostbitten while “actually engaged in combat” was authorized during the Korea War. However, PTSD is not and as never been listed as an example of injuries or wounds that qualify for award of the Purple Heart, and until the requirements for the award of the Purple Heart changes, there is no basis for granting the applicant’s requested relief. 4. The applicant’s claim that he suffers from PTSD, as documented by the VA Rating Decision provided, is not in question. However, PTSD is not and as never been listed as an example of injuries or wounds that qualify for award of the Purple Heart. Therefore, there is insufficient evidence upon which to base award of the Purple Heart in this case. 5. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement related to award of the Purple Heart. The applicant and all others concerned should know that this decision in no way diminishes the sacrifices made by the applicant 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) AR20080007231 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080007231 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1