ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 17 August 2022 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20220001134 APPLICANT REQUESTS: reconsideration of his previous request to show he was entitled and awarded the Purple Heart (PH). APPLICANT’S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of (Military Record) * An example of a Personal Action Request * Statements and documents provided by Colonel (Retired) * Photographs * Map of the Iron Triangle Operation, dated 10 December 1965 * Personnel Roster * Personal statement by COL (Retired) * General Orders Number 3604, dated 10 June 1966 * Statement by Applicant FACTS: 1. Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR2010025141, dated 21 April 2011. 2. The applicant states he believes he is entitled to the Purple Heart, because the rules were unfair. He thought he would receive the Purple Heart when he got to his next unit, which was A Company, 2nd Battalion, 36th Infantry, 3rd Armored Division; however, he never heard anything more about it and 55 years have passed. 3. The applicant provides: a. A statement from Colonel (Retired) who sent the applicant a roster of Company A and a document that is listed as “wounded in action”. COL also makes the comment, “…I am sending a map all the operation where you were wounded…”. This document is difficult to read the names but appears to read “[Applicant’s name”. b. A personnel roster of Soldiers attached to Company A, APO 96347, as of 31 January 1966. The applicant’s name is listed on this document. c. A statement from Colonel (Retired), states: (1) “It came to my attention recently that a member of my command in 1965, Company A, 502nd Parachute Regiment, [applicant] had not received an award for an action in which he was involved on December 10, 1965. The mission of the two battalions deployed from the 101st Airborne Division into War Zone D from Phan Rang was to assist the 1st Infantry Division and South Vietnamese allies who had suffered severe losses in combat against North Vietnamese regulars. Our battalion was given a mission on 9 December to move into a rubber plantation area in the Iron Triangle, where intelligence believed was the location of a force of 800 enemy troops. (2) We decided to send a reconnaissance patrol ahead to a location on the north side of the plantation. A SGT’s squad from the third platoon received the mission. I believed it was composed of 8 troops, but the SGT had received a newly assigned trooper on the afternoon of 9 December, ([applicant]), who went along with the SGT’s patrol. The patrol crossed the Thi Thin River after dark and proceeded to its designated location. The rest of the company crossed the river at a slightly different location at 0200 hours on 10 December. After the crossing, we turned south to secure the western end of a bridge to be used by the other two companies. In the process, we encountered a cluster of booby traps that killed one soldier and wounded four others. I halted the company to avoid tripwires that we could not see in the dark. (3) Having covered the bridge after daylight, we received orders to proceed westward on the southern side of the plantation, a change from the original plan. We were, therefore, over 5 kilometers from the patrol location when it came under enemy attack. It took the company about 50 minutes to cover the distance to the platoon, reached at 0930 hours, which had meanwhile repelled several enemy attacks. Three members of the platoon died, and three were wounded, plus [applicant]. (4) [Applicant] with a minor head wound, elected to remain with his unit. The policy in effect at the time required soldiers to receive treatment at the Brigade Aid Station or a hospital to qualify for a Purple Heart. Those of us in the field disagreed with this policy since it prevented soldiers whose wounds were not life-threatening and who, out of pride in unit remained in the field, from receiving a Purple Heart.. The eventual realization that this policy was unfair resulted in a change. This policy change in the summer of 1966, giving the brigade the authority to issue such awards. However, the original rules prevented soldiers like [applicant] from receiving a Purple Heart, while others with similar wounds, later on, received theirs. I believe this result is unjust, and it was difficult to explain to walking wounded soldiers that if they had received their injuries before a specific date, they could not receive such awards, but their fellow soldiers with similar wounds could receive them after the specified time.” d. General Orders Number 3604, dated 10 June 1966, shows the applicant was awarded the Army Commendation Medal with “V” Device for heroism. This document does not reveal that the applicant was wounded in action against hostile enemy. e. The applicant provides a self-authored statement, which states, that during a combat operation with the North Vietnamese, “about an hour had passed when I saw Soldiers coming from my right. I told the SGT that I could see Soldiers dressed in khaki clothing, coming our way. He told me to tell the oncoming Soldiers that we were Americans. I screamed and told them and they proceeded to open fire on us with automatic weapons! I started to then shoot back, as did my buddy as well. Just a few minutes later he screamed at me that he had been shot. I asked him where he had been hit, but he was only able to make sounds back to me. I could see that he was bleeding from his ears, nose and mouth. I didn't even realize that I had been shot as well, until I could not see out of my right eye. I had been grazed by a bullet over my right temple. We held our position, but it was costly. 2 more Soldiers died, and one other was wounded.” f. He provides an additional statement in which he states that many of the Soldiers who were with him during combat, and where he was injured were killed in action, which is why he cannot get any witnesses to provide statements. 4. A review of the applicant’s service record shows the following documentation: a. DD Form 4 (Enlistment Record) shows on 11 June 1965, he enlisted in the Regular Army. b. His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) reflects that during his service in the RVN he was assigned to Company A, 2nd Battalion, 502nd lnfantry Regiment. This document also shows in: * Item 22 (Military Occupational Specialties): 11B40 Light Weapons Infantryman * Item 31 (Foreign Service): he served in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) from 28 November 1965 to 28 November 1966 * ltem 40 (Wounds): does not contain any entries identifying casualty wounds he sustained during his service in Vietnam. c. His DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge), for the period ending on 23 May 1968 shows he was honorably released from active duty, and he was transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group (Reinforcement) to complete his remaining service obligation. He completed 2 years, 11 months, and 13 days of total active service. Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, commendations, citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) does not reflect the award of the Purple Heart 5. A review of the Vietnam Casualty Roster does not reveal the applicant’s name or contains any orders awarding him the award of the Purple Heart. 6. His available record also does not contain any medical documents pertaining to the treatment of any wounds or injuries sustained by the applicant during his service in Vietnam. 7. 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 Military Awards Branch of the U.S. Army Human Resources Command, failed to reveal any orders for the Purple Heart pertaining 8. In a Prior ABCMR Docket Number dated 21 April 2011, shows that the Board denied his request for a Purple Heart. The Board reasoned there was insufficient evidence to support his request. In addition, there was no documentation to verify he was wounded in Vietnam or that his wounds were the result of hostile action that required treatment and was made a matter of official record. 9. The applicant is entitled to additional awards not listed on his DD Form 214. BOARD DISCUSSION: 1. After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found that relief was not warranted. The Board carefully considered the applicant's record of service, documents submitted in support of the petition and executed a comprehensive and standard review based on law, policy and regulation. Upon review of the applicant’s petition and available military records the Board determined there is no medical record showing the applicant received wounds caused by enemy forces that required treatment by medical personnel. The applicant has no medical documentation showing a loss of consciousness nor that shows he was restricted from duty for a period equaling 48 hours or more. Therefore, the applicant did not meet the requirements for award of the Purple Heart and the Board denied relief. 2. Per the regulatory guidance on awarding the Purple Heart, the applicant must provide or have in his service records substantiating evidence to verify that he was injured, 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. 3. Prior to closing the case, the Board did note the analyst of record administrative notes below, and recommended the correction is completed to more accurately depict the military service of the applicant. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING X X X DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: Except for the correction addressed in Administrative Note(s) below, the Board found the evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number, dated 21 April 2011. 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. ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE(S): A review of the applicant’s records shows he is authorized additional awards not listed on his DD Form 214. As a result, amend his DD Form 214 by: a. Deleting his VSM. b. Add the following awards: o VSM with two bronze service stars o RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation o Valorous Unit Award o Meritorious Unit Commendation o Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-14) REFERENCES: 1. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning individual military decorations. a. The PH is awarded for a wound or wounds sustained in action against an enemy or as a result of hostile action. Substantiating evidence must be provided that verifies the wound resulted from hostile action, required treatment by medical personnel, and that treatment was made a matter of official record. A wound is an injury to any part of the body from an outside force or agent sustained under one or more of the conditions listed above. A physical lesion is not required, however, the wound for which the award is made must have required treatment by medical personnel and records of medical treatment for wounds or injuries received in action must have been made a matter of official record. b. The VSM is awarded to all members of the Armed Forces of the United States for qualifying service in Vietnam after 3 July 1965 through 28 March 1973. Qualifying service included attachment to or assignment for 1 or more days with an organization participating in or directly supporting military operations. A bronze service star will be authorized for wear on the VSM for participation in each credited campaign. 2. DA Pamphlet 672-3, shows that during his service in the RVN, participation credit was awarded for the following campaigns: * Vietnam Counteroffensive, (25 December 1965—30 June 1966 * Vietnam Counteroffensive, Phase II, (1 July 1966—31 May 1967 3. DA Pamphlet 672-3, shows that during his military service, he was assigned to Company A, 2nd Battalion, 502nd lnfantry Regiment. His unit was awarded the following awards: * Valorous Unit Award (17 January 1966 - 25 March 1966), Department of the Army General Order (DAGO) 1, 1969 * Meritorious Unit Commendation (29 July 1965 – 1 October 1966), DAGO 1, 1969 4. DAGO 8, 1974, announced award of the RVN Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm for service in Vietnam to Headquarters, United States Military Assistance Command and its subordinate units during the period 8 February 1962 to 28 March 1973 and Headquarters, United States Army Vietnam and its subordinate units during the period 20 July 1965 to 28 March 1973 5. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), in effect at the time, prescribed the separation documents prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active duty service or control of the Active Army. It established standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214. The instructions stated to list awards and decorations for all periods of service. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20220001134 1 1