Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9605663aC070209
Original file (9605663aC070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Approved
2.  The applicant requests that his military records be corrected to reflect award of the Bronze Star Medal with “V” device.  He states he was awarded an Army Commendation Medal with “V” device instead of a Bronze Star Medal based on an incomplete award recommendation.  In support of his request he submit statements from two former soldiers who maintain the applicant’s heroism was downplayed because of a confrontation with his unit commander.  Additionally, he submits an October 1994 statement from the former commanding general, 4th Infantry Division who indicated that had the information contained in the applicant’s request been available at the time he would have awarded him the Bronze Star Medal.

3.  Records available to the Board indicate the applicant entered active duty on 30 January 1968 and following completion of training as an infantryman was assigned to Vietnam in July 1968.

4.  According to his Army Commendation Medal with “V” device he was cited for heroism on 13 September 1968 when his:

“company made contact with a well-entrenched enemy force....  Despite intense enemy automatice weapons and rocket fire, [the applicant] rushed forward to engage the enemy.  As he maneuvered forward, an enemy soldier blocked his path and wounded him.  Eliminating this opposition, [the applicant] moved forward, despite his wound.  Flanking an enemy bunker he placed accurate fire on it, wounding its occupants thus enabling his company to continue its advance.”

5.  As a result of the injuries sustained on 13 September 1968 the applicant was evacuated and ultimately assigned to Fort Hood, Texas where he was released from active duty effective 18 September 1969 when it was determined that a commitment in his enlistment contract had not been fulfilled.




6.  The statements submitted in support of the applicant’s request were authored in 1989 and 1990.  One statement credits the applicant with killing or wounding more enemy soldiers than what was inferred in his Army Commendation Medal citation and indicates the applicant and his commander “had a heated discussion” about the mission prior to his being evacuated.

7.  The second statement also refers to an “angry exchange of words” between the applicant and his commander and that the exchange resulted in downplaying the applicant’s role in the mission.  This statement notes that the actions of the applicant an another soldier were key to the success of the unit’s mission and “in keeping our company from being overrun on that day....”

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of records confirms the applicant was awarded the Army Commendation Medal for his heroic actions on 13 September 1968.

2.  The applicant maintains that he would have received a Bronze Star Medal with “V” device if the extent of his heroism would have been properly recorded.  His contention is supported by statement from two former members of his command and by the commanding general who approved the original award.

3.  In view of the foregoing, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant’s records as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected:

	a.  by awarding the individual concerned the Bronze Star Medal with “V” device for his heroic actions on 13 September 1968; and

	b.  by revoking the Army Commendation Medal with “V” device which was previously awarded to the applicant for the same action.





		                           
		       ALFREDO CAMPO
		        CHAIRPERSON

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9605663C070209

    Original file (9605663C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT STATES: He was awarded an Army Commendation Medal with “V” device instead of a Bronze Star Medal based on an incomplete award recommendation. One statement credits the applicant with killing or wounding more enemy soldiers than what was inferred in his Army Commendation Medal citation and indicates the applicant and his commander “had a heated discussion” about the mission prior to his being evacuated. The citation contained in the Army Commendation Medal award order would not...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130001035

    Original file (20130001035.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 14 August 2012, this Board also determined there was no evidence of record or independent evidence submitted by the applicant that would support a conclusion that the applicant's award recommendation was not properly processed. Commanders at the time of the act, or shortly thereafter, determined the applicant's actions were so noteworthy as to warrant award of the Army Commendation Medal with "V" Device. However, the Army Decorations Board determined the degree of action and service...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150000358

    Original file (20150000358.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 6 October 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150000358 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. He believes he should have been awarded the BSM with "V"Device and the Air Medal because other members with whom he served received these awards. However, there is no evidence and the applicant provided no evidence which shows he was recommended for or awarded the BSM with "V" Device for heroism on 25 May 1968 in Vietnam.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070015665

    Original file (20070015665.TXT) Auto-classification: Approved

    Headquarters, 71st Evacuation Hospital, General Orders Number 36, dated 31 March 1970, show that the wounded Soldier, described in the applicant's self-authored statement, was awarded the Purple Heart for wounds received in action on 30 March 1970. b. Therefore, there is sufficient evidence to grant the applicant the Purple Heart and correct his records to show this award. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140018137

    Original file (20140018137.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) for the period ending 18 September 1970 to show award of the Purple Heart. His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows in: * item 40 (Wounds) – no injuries or wounds * item 41 (Awards and Decorations) – * National Defense Service Medal * Vietnam Service Medal * Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960) * Bronze Star Medal with "V" Device * Army...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060010567C071029

    Original file (20060010567C071029.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant states, in effect, he received a PH for being wounded in action in January 1968, which is included in his record and on his separation document (DD Form 214), but did not receive a second PH for an incident that occurred on 19 September 1967, when he was flying a helicopter gunship in the An Loc valley in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN). By regulation, 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...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9609660C070209

    Original file (9609660C070209.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He “then shifted his forces to meet an enemy attack from the east and successfully halted the attack forcing the enemy to withdraw.” An evaluation report rendered for the period in question also commended the former servicemember’s actions on 23 August, noting that he drove a 1/4 ton vehicle through the compound carrying wounded personnel to the aid station while “exposing himself to automatic weapons fire at close range.” Orders awarding the Army Commendation Medal with “V” device were...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140002934

    Original file (20140002934.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show he was awarded the: * Silver Star * Bronze Star Medal with 1st Oak Leaf Cluster (OLC) and "V" Device * Army Commendation Medal with "V" Device * Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award) 2. The bold initiative and exemplary courage demonstrated by Sergeant Bxxx significantly contributed to the successful evacuation of the friendly casualties and the defeat of a large...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090002670

    Original file (20090002670.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant’s DD Form 214 shows he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Campaign Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal with two bronze service stars, the Combat Infantryman Badge, and the Army Commendation Medal with "V" Device. However, the approval authority appears to have approved a downgraded award and issued orders awarding the applicant the Army...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017252

    Original file (20080017252.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time, provides that the Good Conduct Medal is awarded to individuals who have completed a qualified period of active duty enlisted service. The applicant requests that the Air Medal with 26 Oak Leaf Clusters, the Purple Heart, the Army Commendation Medal and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Bronze Star be added to his DD Form 214. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be...