RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        19 APRIL 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040004065


      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             |
|     |Ms. Deborah L. Brantley           |     |Senior Analyst       |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Raymond Wagner                |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Larry Bergquist               |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Larry Olson                   |     |Member               |

      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 name, SSAN (Social Security Account
Number), and his place of entry on active duty be corrected.  He also
requests award of the Purple Heart.

2.  The applicant states that his first and middle name is Kenneth Robert
vice Robert Kenney, that the last four digits of his SSAN are 0489 vice
0459, and that he entered active duty in Knoxville, Tennessee vice
Knoxville, Kentucky.  He states that he always knew his name was wrong on
his separation document, but just recently realized the other mistakes on
the document.

3.  He states he needs the corrections because he is tired of explaining
the issues and that now Tri-Care is refusing to pay some of his medical
expenses.

4.  He makes no statement regarding his entitlement to the Purple Heart.

5.  The applicant provides a copy of his birth certificate and a copy of
his SSAN card in support of his request.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
which occurred on 12 April 1968.  The application submitted in this case is
dated
9 July 2004.

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 limitations 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.  A 29 August 1966 record of induction, prepared at the Armed Forces
Entrance and Examination Station in Knoxville, Tennessee, reflects the
applicant’s first name as Robert and his middle name as Kenney

4.  Item 1 (first name, middle name, last name) on a Statement of Personnel
History reflects the handwritten entry of “Kenneth Robert.”  However, that
handwritten entry was lined through and an entry of “Robert Kenneth” was
handwritten in its place.  The applicant authenticated the document as
“Kenneth Robert” on 10 October 1966.

5.  The applicant authenticated an Armed Forces Security Questionnaire on
13 October 1966 as “Robert Kenney” and his name is also typed on the
document as “Robert Kenney.”  An Acknowledgment of Service Obligation was
also authenticated by the applicant as “Robert Kenney” on 13 October 1966
and reflects the typed name of “Robert Kenney.”

6.  An 18 October 1966 National Agency Check request form reflects the
applicant’s first name and middle name as “Robert Kenney” as does his
18 October 1966 request for an Army identification card.  He authenticated
the identification card document as “Robert K.” and continued to sign
documents throughout his military service with the signature “Robert K.”

7.  The National Agency Check request shows his last four digits of his
SSAN as 0489.

8.  When the applicant’s Department of the Army Form 20 (Enlisted
Qualification Record) was prepared, his name was recorded as “Robert K.”
and the last four digits of his SSAN were recorded as 0489.  The applicant
authenticated the form as “Robert K.” on 18 October 1966 and certified the
accuracy of the information on the form in September 1967.  In September
1967 he also authenticated his record of emergency data as “Robert K.” and
that form reflected his name as “Robert Kenney.”

9.  The applicant’s records indicate that he arrived in Vietnam in August
1967 and was assigned to the 1st Battalion, 35th Infantry, 4th Infantry
Division.

10.  According to a clinical record cover sheet, the applicant sustained
multiple fragment wounds and the traumatic amputation of his right foot on
4 November 1967 when he was hit by a mine explosion.  The wound was
recorded as resulting from hostile action and the document indicates he was
awarded the Purple Heart in orders published by the 67th Evacuation
Hospital on 5 November 1967.  Copies of those orders were not in records
available to the Board, and the applicant’s separation document does not
reflect award of the Purple Heart.

11.  Orders issued by the 4th Infantry Division indicate the applicant was
awarded the Bronze Star Medal for meritorious service between August 1967
and November 1967.  The award, however, was omitted from his separation
document.

12.  As a result of the applicant’s injuries he was medically evacuated
from Vietnam and on 12 April 1968 he was permanently retired by reason of
physical disability in pay grade E-3.

13.  The applicant’s separation document, which he authenticated as “Robert
K.” reflects his first and middle names as “Robert Kenney.”  It also
reflects the last four digits of his SSAN as 0459 and that he entered
active duty in Knoxville, Kentucky.  His entitlement to the Vietnam Service
Medal and the National Defense Service Medal are the only decorations
reflected on his separation document.

14.  Army Regulation 635-5, which establishes the policies and provisions
for the preparation of separation documents, states that a comparison
should be made between the individual’s enlistment documents and personnel
qualification record to determine if a name change has occurred prior to
entering the individual's name in item 1 on the separation document.

15.  The birth certificate provided by the applicant was issued in November
1970. When originally filed in April 1947 it did not reflect a first or
middle name, but only “Boy.”  The document indicates that a “supplemental
report” was filed by the applicant’s mother in May 1947 and apparently at
that time the name “Kenneth Robert” was written above the original entry.

16.  The applicant’s SSAN card confirms the last four digits of his SSAN
are 0489.

17.  A review of Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and
Campaign Participation Credit Register) notes the applicant’s unit was
credited with participating in one designated campaign (Vietnam
Counteroffensive Phase III) during the applicant’s period of assignment.
One bronze service star on the Vietnam Service Medal, which is recorded on
his separation document, should reflect his campaign participation.  The
unit was also awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation
with Palm and the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class
Unit Citation during his tenure with the organization.  The unit awards
were also omitted from his separation document.

18.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent
part, for award of the Vietnam Campaign Medal (VCM).  The Government of
Vietnam awarded this medal to all members of the Armed Forces of the United
States for qualifying service in Vietnam during the period 1 March 1961
through 28 March 1973.  Qualifying service included assignment in Vietnam
for 6 months or service outside the geographical limits of the Republic of
Vietnam that contributed direct combat support to the Republic of Vietnam
and its Armed Forces.  Individuals who had qualified for award of the
Vietnam Service Medal or the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal and were
evacuated prior to completing six months of service due wounds resulting
from hostile action were entitled to award of the Vietnam Campaign Medal.

19.  Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time when the service member
was discharged, required that throughout a qualifying period of service for
award of the Good Conduct Medal the enlisted person must have had all
“excellent” conduct and efficiency ratings and no convictions by a court-
martial.  This period is 3 years except in those cases when the period for
the first award ends with the termination of a period of Federal military
service.  With the publication of the new Army Regulation 672-5-1, in 1974,
the requirement for all excellent conduct and efficiency ratings was
dropped and an individual was required to show that he/she willingly
complied with the demands of the military environment, had been loyal and
obedient, and faithfully supported the goals of his organization and the
Army.  Today, Army Regulation 600-8-22, which replaced Army Regulation 672-
5-1, notes that there is no automatic entitlement to the Army Good Conduct
Medal and disqualification must be justified.  Current practice requires
that the commander provide written notice of nonfavorable consideration and
permits the individual to respond.

20.  The applicant’s conduct and efficiency ratings throughout his military
service were excellent, and he had no record of any disciplinary actions or
incidents of misconduct.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence confirms that the applicant was injured as a result of
hostile action and awarded the Purple Heart by a medical activity.
Although his records do not contain a copy of those orders, it would be
appropriate, and in the interest of justice, to correct his records to
reflect award of the Purple Heart.

2.  The evidence also shows that the applicant was awarded a Bronze Star
Medal, and that he is entitled to one bronze service star on his Vietnam
Service Medal, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with
Palm, the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit
Citation, and the Vietnam Campaign Medal.

3.  The applicant completed a qualifying period of service for award of the
Army Good Conduct Medal on 12 April 1968.  There is no evidence his
commander ever disqualified him from receiving the award and no evidence of
any misconduct which would justify denying him the award.  In view of the
foregoing, the Board concludes that the applicant met the basic
qualifications for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal and it would be
appropriate and in the interest of equity to award him that decoration for
the period 13 October 1966 through
12 April 1968.

4.  There is sufficient evidence to conclude that the applicant entered
active duty in Knoxville, Tennessee, vice Knoxville, Kentucky, and that the
last four digits of his SSAN on his separation document are 0489 vice 0459.

5.  Unfortunately, while the applicant’s birth certificate does reflect his
first and middle name as “Kenneth Robert” it is unclear why he consistently
authenticated documents throughout his military service as “Robert K.” and
in some instances as “Robert Kenney.”  It is also unclear why he lined
through the name “Kenneth Robert” on his statement of personal history and
entered the name “Robert Kenneth” although he did sign the document as
“Kenneth Robert.”

6.  The Army has an obligation for historical purposes to maintain records
as they were constituted at the time of creation.  Accordingly, in the
absence of a reasonable explanation for the variance in the applicant’s
birth name, and the utilization of a different name throughout his military
service, it would be inappropriate at this time to correct his records.

7.  However, because other corrections are being made to the applicant’s
1968 separation document, in the interest of clarity and to assist the
applicant in the future, it would be appropriate to add the entry “AKA
[also known as] Kenneth Robert” to item 1 of his separation document.


BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

__RW___  ___LB __  ___LO  __  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION




BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to
warrant a recommendation for partial 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:

      a.  by showing he was awarded the Purple Heart and Bronze Star Medal;


      b.  by showing that he is entitled to one bronze service star on his
Vietnam Service Medal, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit
Citation with Palm, the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First
Class Unit Citation, and the Vietnam Campaign Medal;


      c.  by awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period
13 October 1966 through 12 April 1968;

      d.  by correcting his place on entry on active duty to read
Knoxville, Tennessee vice Knoxville, Kentucky;

      e.  by correcting the last four digits of his SSAN to read 0489 vice
0459; and
      f.  by adding the entry “AKA Kenneth Robert” to item 1 of his 1968
separation document.

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
correcting his records to show that his name is Kenneth Robert vice Robert
Kenney.




                            ____ Raymond Wagner______
                                      CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040004065                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050419                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |PARTIAL GRANT                           |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |107.00                                  |
|2.                      |110.00                                  |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]