RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        JANUARY 19, 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2004105843


      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. Deyon D. Battle               |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Bernard P. Ingold             |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Larry C. Bergquist            |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Delia R. Trimble              |     |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 restoration of her pay grade from E-1 to E-5.
She also requests that her Certificate of Release or Discharge (DD Form
214) be corrected to reflect the awards of the Purple Heart; the Bronze
Star Medal; the Soldier’s Medal; the Good Conduct Medal; the National
Defense Service Medal; the Vietnam Service Medal; and the Vietnam Wound
Medal.

2.  The applicant states that she was absent without leave (AWOL) due to
medical conditions cause by injuries that were incurred during her initial
period of enlistment.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of a data printout, which reflects
information regarding her Army service; a copy of her Department of
Veterans Affairs Rating Decision; and copies of her DD Form 214 covering
her last period of service.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or
injustice, which occurred on 18 December 1980.  The application submitted
in this case is dated 10 March 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 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 requested correction of her records, in part, to show
award of the Bronze Star Medal, the Purple Heart and the Soldier’s Medal.
There are no orders or other evidence authorizing award of these
decorations to the applicant. In the absence of a proper authority for
these decorations, the applicant may request award of the Bronze Star Medal
and the Soldier’s Medal under the provisions of Section 1130 of Title 10,
United States Code.  The applicant has been notified by separate
correspondence of the procedures for applying for this decoration under
Section 1130 and, as a result, it will not be discussed further in this
Record of Proceedings.



4.  On 13 June 1974, she enlisted in the United States Army Reserve (USAR),
under the delayed entry program.  She enlisted in the Regular Army on 26
June 1974, for 2 years in the pay grade of E-1.  She successfully completed
her training as a radio relay and carrier attendant.  She was honorably
released from active duty on 25 June 1976, at the expiration of her term of
service and she was transferred to the USAR Control Group to complete her 6-
year Reserve obligation.

5.  The DD Form 214 that she was furnished at the time of her release from
active duty shows that during this period of enlistment she completed an
overseas tour of duty in Korea that lasted for a period of 1 year and 1
month.  The DD Form 214 also shows that she was awarded the National
Defense Service Medal during this period of service.

6.  On 12 September 1978, she reenlisted in the Army for 4 years in the pay
grade of E-3 and she was transferred to Korea on 23 September 1978.  She
was promoted to the pay grade of E-4 on 16 February 1979 and she was
transferred to Italy on 24 September 1979.  She was promoted to the pay
grade of E-5 on 13 October 1979.

7.  Nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against the applicant on 6 May
1980, for being AWOL for one day.  Her punishment consisted of a forfeiture
of pay, restriction and extra duty.

8.  On 15 May 1980, NJP was imposed against her for being AWOL and for
failure to obey a lawful order of a noncommissioned officer (NCO).  Her
punishment consisted of a suspended reduction to the pay grade of E-4.

9.  She had NJP imposed against her again on 5 August 1980, for being AWOL
for 2 days.  Her punishment consisted of the vacation of her suspended
reduction to the pay grade of E-4.

10.  On 25 September 1980, the applicant was barred from reenlisting as a
result of her disciplinary record, which consisted of numerous violations
of military rules and regulations, in addition to her three records of NJP.
 In the bar, the commander stated that the applicant had been a continuous
disciplinary problem and that she had refused to perform her assigned
duties, all to the detriment of the morale and function of the unit.




11.  Although the special court-martial order is not available for review,
the evidence of record shows that on 29 October 1980, the applicant was
convicted by a special court-martial of eight incidents of being AWOL;
being disrespectful to a NCO; cruelty and maltreatment to a person subject
to obey her orders; and two incidents of failure to obey general articles.
Her sentence consisted of confinement and a reduction to the pay grade of E-
1.  She remained in confinement from 29 October 1980 until 5 November 1980.

12.  The applicant returned from Italy to the Continental United States on
6 November 1980, and was assigned to Fort Riley, Kansas.

13.  On 10 December 1980, the applicant submitted a request for discharge
under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 8, due to
pregnancy.  The appropriate authority approved her request for discharge.
Accordingly, on 18 December 1980, the applicant was honorably discharged
under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 8, due to
pregnancy.  She had completed 4 years, 1 month and 4 days of total active
service.

14.  The DD Form 214 that she was furnished at the time of her discharge
shows her authorized decorations as the Good Conduct Medal (1st award) and
the National Defense Service Medal.

15.  The applicant’s Army medical records are unavailable for review.
However, a review of the available records fails to show that the applicant
sustained an injury during either of her periods on active duty.

16.  On 17 October 1985, this Board denied the applicant’s request for
restoration of her pay grade from E-1 to E-4.

17.  On 4 December 2003, this Board denied the applicant’s request for
award of the Women’s Army Corps Service Medal; the Republic of Korea
Presidential Unit Citation; and the Korean Service Medal.

18.  Both Army Regulation 600-200 and the Manual for Courts-Martial, then
in effect, stipulated that a service member convicted by a special court-
martial would be reduced to the pay grade of E-1 when the sentence included
confinement.





19.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent
part, for award of the Vietnam Service Medal.  This medal 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.

20.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 also 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:  (1) the
wound was the result of hostile action; (2) the wound required medical
treatment; and (3) the medical treatment was made a matter of official
record.

21.  The Vietnam Wound Medal was a military decoration of South Vietnam,
which was first created in 1950.  The decoration is the Vietnamese
equivalent of the Purple Heart and is awarded to any personnel of the
Vietnamese military who, while engaged in armed combat with enemies of the
Republic of Vietnam, are either killed or wounded in action.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The actions by the Army in this case appear to have been correct and
there is no doubt to be resolved in favor of the applicant.

2.  The evidence of record shows that the applicant was reduced to the pay
grade of E-1 as a result of the imposition of NJP and a special court-
martial conviction that included confinement for a period of time.
Therefore, in accordance with the applicable regulation, she was properly
reduced to the pay grade of E-1 and she has submitted no evidence to show
that the action taken by the Army was incorrect.

3.  There is no evidence in the available record, nor has the applicant
submitted any evidence to support her contention that she was AWOL due to
medical conditions cause by injuries incurred during her initial period on
active duty.  Therefore, it appears that the rationale that she now
provides for going AWOL is without merit.

4.  A review of the applicant’s DD Form 214 reflects the award of the
National Defense Service Medal.  Therefore, no additional consideration was
given to this portion of her request.

5.  The applicant is not entitled to the Vietnam Service Medal, as she
never served in Vietnam.  She is not entitled to the Purple Heart, as there
is no evidence that she was ever wounded as a result of hostile action by
enemy forces; therefore, the Purple Heart was properly not included on her
DD Form 214.  Moreover, she is not entitled to the Vietnam Wound Medal as
that medal was awarded to any personnel of the Vietnamese military who,
while engaged in armed combat with enemies of the Republic of Vietnam, are
either killed or wounded in action.

6.  She was never a member of of the Vietnamese military; she never served
in Vietnam; and there is no evidence in the available records that show
that she was wounded in action.  Therefore, the Vietnam Service Medal; the
Vietnam Wound Medal; and the Purple Heart were appropriately not included
on her DD Form 214 and it appears that her separation documents are correct
as currently reflected.

7.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 18 December 1980; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on 17 December 1983.  However, the applicant did not file
within the 3-year statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling
explanation or evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice
to excuse failure to timely file in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

lcb___   _  drt__    __  bpi___  __  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented does not demonstrate
the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board
determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis
for correction of the records of the individual concerned.



2.  As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence
provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year
statute of limitations prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient
basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for
correction of the records of the individual concerned.




                                  _____Bernard P. Ingold____
                                            CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2004105843                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050119                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.  46   |107.0000.0000/AWARDS                    |
|2.  115                 |107.0069.0000/NDSM                      |
|3.  119                 |107.0073.0000/VSM                       |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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