APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That his general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.  He also requests award of the Purple Heart and the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB)

APPLICANT STATES:  He makes no statement as to his discharge.  As to the awards, he states, in effect, he should have received the Purple Heart when he lost his hearing due a mortar shell explosion and the CIB when he was in a fire fight on the front line.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant’s military records show:

He was born on 21 January 1948.  He completed 11 years of formal education.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 2 November 1967 for 2 years.  He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 94B (Cook).  He served a tour in Vietnam and was honorably discharged on 11 November 1969.  He reenlisted in the Regular Army on 28 December 1970 for 3 years, was honorably discharged and immediately reenlisted on 28 April 1971.  He served again in Vietnam from 4 August        1971 - 16 April 1972.

On 27 September 1972, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for negligently failing to properly supervise.

On 27 November 1972, the applicant accepted NJP under Article 15, UCMJ for being absent without leave (AWOL) 20 - 27 November 1972.

On 13 March 1973, the applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial for being AWOL 18 December 1972 - 13 February 1973.  He was sentenced to a forfeiture of $190 pay per month for 1 month.

On 11 August 1973, the applicant accepted NJP under Article 15, UCMJ for failure to repair.

On 17 September 1973, the applicant accepted NJP under Article 15, UCMJ for failing to go to his appointed place of duty.

In September 1973, the applicant’s commander initiated separation proceedings under Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 13 for unfitness, an established pattern of shirking.

On 20 September 1973, the applicant acknowledged notification of the proposed separation action and requested his case be heard by a board of officers and that he be represented by counsel.

On 8 January 1974, the board of officers was convened.  Testimony against the applicant brought out such statements as that he had been counseled 17 times for indebtedness, he did not do “soldiering” (preparing for inspections, keeping shoes shined and one’s locker clean) well, and that he did his cook’s job well but felt his only duty was cooking.  The applicant brought out that he liked the Army and wanted to make a career of it.  He only went AWOL to take care of his sick mother.

The board determined the applicant was undesirable for further retention because of habitual shirking and because of an established pattern showing dishonorable failure to pay just debts.

The approving authority determined the applicant was resisting all attempts to be rehabilitated and directed his discharge for unfitness.

On 8 February 1974, he was discharged, in pay grade E-3, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 13, for unfitness, with a general discharge. He had completed 4 years, 10 months and 28 days of creditable active service and had 64 days of lost time.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 13, then in effect, contained the policy and outlined the procedures for separating individuals for unfitness when, among other conditions, an established pattern for shirking or showing dishonorable failure to pay just debts exists and further efforts at rehabilitation were unlikely to succeed or they were not amenable to rehabilitation measures.

Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides Department of the Army policy, criteria and administrative instructions concerning individual military decorations, the Good Conduct Medal, service medals and service ribbons, combat and special skill badges and tabs and similar devices awarded in recognition of accomplishments.

The regulation cites three requirements for award of the CIB.  The soldier must be an infantryman satisfactorily performing infantry duties, must be assigned to an infantry unit during such time as the unit is engaged in active ground combat, and must actively participate in such ground combat.  While the applicant may have been actively involved in a fire fight, he did not do so as an infantryman.  He served as a cook.

For award of the Purple Heart, the regulation defines a wound as an injury to any part of the body from an outside force or agent sustained under enemy action.  There need not be a physical lesion; however, the wound for which the award is made must have required treatment by a medical officer and records of medical treatment for wounds or injuries received in action must have been made a matter of official record.  The applicant’s medical records were not available and the applicant did not furnish supporting documentation to show he received medical treatment for his cited hearing injury.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  The type of discharge and the reasons therefor were appropriate considering all the facts of the case.

2.  The applicant is ineligible for award of the CIB.  The available records do not show and the applicant has not provided any convincing evidence to demonstrate that he is entitled to award of the Purple Heart.

3.  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 the aforementioned requirement.

4.  In view of the foregoing, there appears to be no basis for granting the applicant’s request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has filed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.






BOARD VOTE:

                       GRANT

                       GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                       DENY APPLICATION




                                Loren G. Harrell
					 	Director