BOARD DATE: 7 November 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160017693 BOARD VOTE: ____x_____ ___x____ ____x____ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration BOARD DATE: 7 November 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160017693 BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. awarding the applicant the Purple Heart for the wound he received in action on 27 January 1967 in Vietnam; b. adding the Purple Heart to his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge). ______________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. BOARD DATE: 7 November 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160017693 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 (PH). 2. The applicant states he was wounded on 27 January 1967 in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN), and he never received the PH for his wound. The medic, SP4 D___ E___, who treated him that day was killed in action later on that same day and he was posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor. He remained in the field and continued to engage the enemy because they were short on manpower. He believes this may be the reason his wound was not documented. 3. The applicant provides copies of: * a journal entry from a fellow Soldier in his unit who kept a journal for his RVN service * DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge), dated 14 December 1965 * DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214), dated 24 March 2016 * witness statement from Mr. H____M. O_____, signed on 12 July 2016 * VA Form 21-4138 (Statement in Support of Claim), dated 26 September 2016 * witness statement from Mr. N____ W. S____, signed, witnessed, and notarized on 27 July 2017 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. On 14 December 1965, the applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States. After initial training, he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman). 3. A DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows in: a. item 31 (Foreign Service) – he was assigned to the U.S. Army Pacific (USARPAC), RVN, from 22 September 1966 through 11 August 1967; b. item 38 (Record of Assignments) – he was assigned to Company A, 2nd Battalion, 12th Infantry, 4th Infantry Division, USARPAC, from 22 September 1966 to 7 August 1967; c. item 40 (Wounds) – no entries describing a wound; and d. item 41 (Awards and Decorations) – no entry for the PH. 4. On 15 December 1967, the applicant was honorably separated from active duty. He completed 2 years of net active service. His DD Form 214 shows he was awarded or authorized: * Army Good Conduct Medal * National Defense Service Medal * One Overseas Service Bar * Vietnam Service Medal (VSM) * Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960) 5. On 24 March 2016, the applicant was issued a DD Form 215 correcting item 24 of his DD Form 214 by: a. deleting the VSM; and b. adding the following awards: * Presidential Unit Citation * Combat Infantryman Badge * Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Pistol Bar * Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Machinegun Bar * Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-14) * Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16 * VSM with three bronze service stars * RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation 6. The applicant’s record does not contain any evidence to indicate he received treatment for a combat-related wound or injury while serving in the RVN or at any other time during his active service. 7. A member of the Board's staff reviewed the Department of the Army Vietnam casualty roster and the applicant's name is not included on this roster. 8. A review of the Awards and Decorations Computer-Assisted Retrieval System, an index of general orders issued during the Vietnam era between 1965 and 1973 maintained by the U.S. Army Human Resources Command Awards and Decorations Branch, failed to reveal orders awarding him the PH. 9. The applicant provides a VA Form 21-4138 containing a self-authored statement. He states: a. He served in the RVN from September 1966 until August 1967 with Company A, 2nd Battalion, 12th Infantry, 4th Infantry Division, he held MOS 11B and performed the duties of an M-60 machine gunner. His base camp was located near a small village called Dau Tieng, some sixty-five miles northwest of Saigon, Vietnam. b. His unit was moving toward the wood line in a high-grassy area, where his platoon was leading Company A through the jungle. Their platoon was comprised of two squads because the unit was short on manpower. As the unit got relatively close to the wood line an explosion occurred in front of them and they immediately hit the ground. A short time passed and they moved forward again and a second explosion occurred. Within a minute or so, they were on the move a third time and within seconds of moving forward, they received a heavy volume of small arms fire. This is when all hell broke loose. c. A Soldier was wounded and bleeding profusely due to a fragment that went through his arm. He and another Soldier were laying on a small anthill returning fire into the wood line. They were also receiving small arms fire and incoming grenades from the North Vietnamese in the wood line. d. The Soldier next to him was trying to unjam his weapon and he was firing at the North Vietnamese. A grenade went off directly to his left, maybe ten to fifteen feet away. Even though he was close to the ground, he got hit by some small grenade fragment near left eye and cheek. The medic, SP4 D__ E___, checked this superficial wound. There was very little blood, but his head and left ear were hurting. It was determined he was okay and he remained in the field. He did not give it much thought because a lot of adrenaline was flowing. More attempts were made by the third platoon to take the North Vietnamese, but the unit finally pulled back several miles to allow for heavy bombing of the area by aircraft. e. It was not until recently, in 2005, that he met with some fellow Soldiers who were in his unit in Vietnam. One of those Soldiers had a journal that documented certain operations they were engaged in, the names of the wounded, and the names of those who were killed. The applicant’s name was listed under 27 January 1967 as having been wounded. Even though his name was spelled incorrectly as “Garrety,” his name was listed. His fellow Soldiers did not know he did not receive the PH for his wound on 27 January 1967, and they have written corroborating statements to this fact. They were serving with him on this date in question. 10. The applicant provides two statements in support of his claim from witnesses attesting to his wounding on 27 January 1967. Mr. H___ M. O_____ (then a staff sergeant (SSG)) was a member of Company A, 2nd Battalion, 12th Infantry, 3rd Brigade, 4th Infantry Division, and he was serving with the applicant at the time he was wounded in the RVN. He states: a. He and the applicant attended basic and advanced infantry training together at Fort Lewis, WA. They left Tacoma, WA, by troop ship and arrived in Vong Tau, RVN, on 14 October 1966. They were together at Camp Martin Cox in the Rung Sat Zone in the RVN and were in Operations Attleboro and Bremerton. They set up base camp "Rainer” at Dou Tieng, in War Zone C. While there, they were involved in Operations Gadsden, Cedar Falls, and Junction City. b. On 27 January 1967, north of Tri Tam in the RVN, their squad was engaged by Vietnamese at their fortified base camp. They were pinned down by heavy weapons fire, and exploding grenades. During this battle, three Soldiers were killed, including the medic SP4 D___ E___, and nine Soldiers were wounded, including the applicant. Mr. O_____ states he was the squad leader and he remembers the applicant bleeding below the left eye from a small piece of shrapnel. He asked the applicant to stay in the field because the unit was short-handed due to heavy losses. He also provides a page from a journal that he kept while serving in in the RVN. 11. The journal lists the days they made contact with the enemy and the names of Soldiers who were killed or wounded in action, which includes the applicant’s name. 12. Mr. N____ W. S_____, (then a sergeant (SGT), and a member of Company A, 2nd Battalion, 12th Infantry, 3rd Brigade, 4th Infantry Division, was also serving with the applicant, in the RVN at the time he was wounded. He states: a. On 27 January 1967, Company A was on a search and destroy mission in War Zone C, 4 miles northwest of Dau Tieng Base Camp, during Operation “Nisqually.” The second platoon was in the lead, and he was squad leader, leading the right column and Mr. O____ (SSG) was leading the left column. b. At 15:00 hours, they were clearing high grass near the tree line in the jungle and came under enemy fire. The unit took up a defensive position approximately fifty meters in the jungle. The unit was under attack from a well-fortified enemy bunker, and they were receiving heavy automatic weapons fire, small arms fire, and a barrage of grenades. One grenade exploded ten meters in front of him. A Soldier, five meters to his left, was hit in the arm with grenade fragments and fell back for medical help. c. The applicant and another Soldier moved up to help. The applicant took up a firing position just to his right, on a large anthill. A grenade exploded just in front of the applicant and he was hit by fragment just below his left eye, another Soldier was hit on the left side. The unit was given an order to fall back for artillery and airstrikes when the unit reached a safe position. In the end, three Soldiers were killed in action, and the most seriously wounded were airlifted to base camp. The applicant and the rest of the less seriously wounded were treated in the field. Mr. S____ believes the applicant deserves the PH for the wound he received during that battle against hostile forces on 27 January 1967. 1c. A Citation for the Medal of Honor confirms the applicant’s claim that SP4 D___ E___ (the medic he states treated him) was assigned to his unit, Company A, 2nd Battalion, 12th Infantry, 4th Infantry Division, in the RVN, and he was killed in action on 27 January 1967, and posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor for his heroic actions on this date. REFERENCES: Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides that the PH 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. DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant contends he should be awarded the PH for the wound he received in action against a hostile force on 27 January 1967. He states he received a shrapnel wound from grenade fragment near his left eye and cheek, but others were more severely wounded and were medically evacuated. The unit was short on manpower so he continued to serve with his unit. 2. The applicant’s service record is void of evidence showing he was wounded due to hostile action and his name is not listed on the Vietnam casualty roster. 3. The criteria for the PH require that the wound for which the award is being made must have been sustained as a result of hostile action, the wound must have required medical treatment by medical personnel, and the record of medical treatment for the wound must have been made a matter of official record. 4. The applicant points out the medic who treated him, on 27 January 1967 died in battle on this date and he was posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor, which provides a reasonable explanation of why a treatment record is not available. 5. The applicant provides two witness statements attesting to his injury in the RVN on 27 January 1967, while assigned to Company A, 2nd Battalion, 12th Infantry, 4th Infantry Division. The witnesses state the applicant was wounded engaging a hostile force and he was treated by the unit medic. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160017693 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160017693 7 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2