RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


         IN THE CASE OF:
        

         BOARD DATE: FEBRUARY 2, 2004
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2003090955


         I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director
Mr. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler		Chairperson
Ms. Regan K. Smith		Member
Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		Member

         The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any).

---

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1. The applicant requests that his report of separation (DD Form 214) be corrected to show his awards of the Purple Heart, the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB), the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM), and two bronze service stars to denote his campaign participation.

2. The applicant states, in effect, that he was awarded the Purple Heart, the CIB, the AGCM and two bronze service stars; however, they were not included on his DD Form 214 at the time of his release from active duty (REFRAD). He goes on to state that he no longer has the documentation to prove that he was awarded those decorations but feels confident that there is a record of them somewhere and he desires to leave the awards with his children when he passes away.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1. The applicant is requesting correction of an error which occurred on 6 April 1973. The application submitted in this case is dated 3 April 2003.

2. 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 allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file within the 3-year statute of limitation if the ABCMR determines that it would be in the interest of justice to do so. In this case, the ABCMR will conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3. The applicant enlisted in San Antonio, Texas, on 31 March 1970 for a period of 3 years. He completed his basic combat training at Fort Lewis, Washington, and his advanced individual training (AIT) as a cargo handler at Fort Eustis, Virginia. Upon completion of his AIT he was transferred to Patrick Air Force Base, Florida with duty at Cape Kennedy. He was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 19 February 1971.

4. On 29 May 1971, he was transferred to Vietnam, where he was initially assigned to the 870^th Transportation Company for duty as an assistant hatch foreman and on 4 January 1972, he was transferred to the 264^th Transportation Company for duty as a forklift operator.

5. He departed Vietnam from the 264^th Transportation Company on 27 April 1972 and was transferred to an infantry company at Fort Hood, Texas, for on the job training as an assistant machine gunner. While at Fort Hood, he went absent without leave (AWOL) from 2 June to 3 June 1972 and from 6 March to 12 March 1973. The available records are silent as to any punishment imposed; however, his conduct and efficiency ratings were listed as "Fair."

6. On 6 April 1973, he was honorably REFRAD on the expiration of his term of service (ETS). He had served 2 years, 11 months and 28 days of total active service and had 9 days of lost time due to AWOL. His DD Form 214 issued at the time of his REFRAD indicates that he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM) with two bronze service stars and the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal.

7. A review of the available records, as well as the Vietnam Casualty Listing fails to show any indication that the applicant was wounded, that he was treated for any wounds, that he was reported as a casualty or that he was awarded the Purple Heart. Additionally, there is no evidence that he possessed the military occupational specialty of an infantryman while in Vietnam, that he was assigned to an infantry unit while in Vietnam or that he engaged in combat as an infantryman in an infantry unit while in Vietnam. There is also no evidence that he was awarded the AGCM.

8. Army Regulation 600-8-22 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 a result of hostile action, that the wound must have required treatment by a medical officer, and that the medical treatment was made a matter of official record.

9. That regulation also provides the criteria for award of the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB). It states, in pertinent part, that to be eligible for the CIB, an individual must be an infantryman with an infantry military occupational specialty (MOS) and must perform duty as an infantryman, as a member of an infantry unit of brigade or smaller size, during any period in which that unit was engaged in ground combat. Battle participation credit alone is not sufficient.

10. Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time, established the criteria for award of the AGCM. It states, in pertinent part, that the AGCM was established by Executive Order 8809, 28 June 1941 and was amended by Executive Order 9323, 1943 and by Executive Order 10444, 10 April 1953 and is awarded for exemplary behavior, efficiency, and fidelity in active Federal military service. The regulation also states, in pertinent part, that the AGCM is awarded for exemplary behavior, efficiency and fidelity in active Federal military service and is awarded on a selective basis to each soldier who distinguishes himself from among other soldiers by exemplary conduct, efficiency and fidelity throughout a specified period of service. There is no right or entitlement to the medal until the immediate commander has made a positive recommendation for its award and until it is announced in General Orders.
11. Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register-Vietnam Era) was published to assist commanders and personnel officers in determining or establishing the eligibility of individual members for campaign participation credit, assault landing credit, and unit citation badges awarded during the Vietnam Conflict. Table 1 (Army Units in Numerical Order) of the pamphlet indicates that the applicant’s unit was subsequently awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm (RVNGC w/Palm) Unit Citation during the period he was assigned to the unit. Additionally, he participated in four campaigns while assigned to Vietnam and is entitled to be awarded four bronze service stars for wear on his already awarded VSM.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1. The applicant has not provided and the available records do not contain any evidence to support the applicant's contention that he was wounded in combat, that he was treated for such wounds or that he was awarded the Purple Heart. Therefore, the Board finds no basis to do so at this time.

2. Likewise, the record is also absent of any evidence to show that he served as an infantryman in an infantry unit that engaged the enemy in combat in Vietnam. Accordingly, there is no basis to award him the CIB at this time.

3. The available records also fail to show that the applicant was awarded the AGCM. However, the records do show that he had two periods of AWOL and that his conduct and efficiency ratings were deemed as "Fair." Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, it must be presumed that the commander at the time elected not to award him the AGCM and the Board finds no basis to award it to him at this time.

4. However, the evidence of record does show that subsequent to his departure from Vietnam, his unit was awarded the RVNGC w/Palm Unit Citation. Additionally, the applicant participated in four campaigns and should have been awarded four bronze service stars for wear on his already awarded VSM, instead of the two that are presently annotated on his DD Form 214.


BOARD VOTE:

sac_____ rks_____ clg_____ GRANT RELIEF

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION

1. The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief and to excuse failure to timely file. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by awarding the applicant the RVNGC w/Palm Unit Citation and two additional bronze service stars for wear on his already awarded VSM, with the appropriate changes being made to his DD Form 214.

2. The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief. As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to awards of the Purple Heart, CIB and AGCM.





                  ___Samuel A. Crumpler___
                  CHAIRPERSON

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003090955
SUFFIX
RECON	YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED	20040203
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION	(GRANT)
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 107.0094	140/rvngc
2. 107.0056	102/agcm
3. 107.0015	61/ph
4. 107.0111	157/cib
5.
6.