RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  21 February 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060007116 


	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.



Director



Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:



Chairperson


Member



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 he be awarded the Purple Heart and the Combat Medical Badge.

2.  The applicant essentially states that these awards were never given to him even though he was wounded in combat and served as a combat medic while in Vietnam.   

3.  The applicant provides a statement and DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) from a former Soldier, a photograph of three Soldiers reportedly taken in Spring 1969, a self-authored statement, dated 14 August 2006, and a letter from a person claiming to be a former battalion surgeon for the 2nd Battalion, 39th Infantry Regiment in support of this application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which occurred on 
5 March 1970, the date of his release from active duty.  The application submitted in this case is dated 11 May 2006.

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.  The applicant’s records show that he was inducted into the Army of the United States on 6 March 1968.  He completed basic and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 91A (Medical Corpsman), which was later converted into MOS 91B (Medical Specialist).  He departed for the Republic of Vietnam on 25 August 1968, and served with Headquarters and Headquarters Company (HHC), 2nd Battalion, 39th Infantry Regiment, 9th Infantry Division.  He returned to the continental United States on 18 July 1969, and served with the 547th Medical Company at Hunter Air Airfield, Georgia until he was honorably released from active duty on 5 March 1970.  The 
DD Form 214 that he was issued at the time of his separation shows that he was awarded the Air Medal, the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal, the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with 1960 Device, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, and the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation with First Oak Leaf Cluster.  

4.  In his application, the applicant essentially stated that he was wounded in action during combat while in Vietnam, and that being a medic, he removed the shrapnel from his leg and treated his wound himself, then attended to his duties.  

5.  He also provided a statement, dated 29 April 2006, from a former Soldier who, as he recalled the event, took place sometime in May 1969.  The former Soldier stated, in effect, the applicant, and two other Soldiers were inside an aid station bunker at Fire Support Base Schroeder, and he clearly remembered a very loud blast followed by a very strong concussion coming from above his head.  He also stated, in pertinent part, that the applicant was preoccupied with shrapnel that was in his leg, but that he appeared OK, so he left the aid station bunker to attend to the casualties. 

6.  The applicant also provided a letter, dated 1 July 2006, from a person who claimed to be the battalion surgeon for the 2nd Battalion, 39th Infantry Regiment, 9th Infantry Division.  This statement essentially stated that the applicant was a talented medic in the medical platoon during his tenure, and that he went out on many missions and had to deal with hostile fire on many occasions and for months without injury.  He also stated, in pertinent part, that the applicant did receive two injuries from incoming mortars; a punctured tympanic membrane [ear drum] and a shrapnel wound to his left leg.  

7.  Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant’s DD Form 214 does not show that he was awarded the Purple Heart.  Item 40 (Wounds) of the applicant’s DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) also does not have any entries which show that he sustained wounds as a result of hostile action.  Item 41 (Awards and Decorations) of this same form does not show that he was awarded the Purple Heart.  There are no general orders in the applicant’s military records which show that he was awarded the Purple Heart.  Further, there is no evidence in the applicant’s military records which shows that he was wounded in action.  Additionally, the applicant’s name is not listed on the Vietnam Casualty Roster.

8.  The applicant also stated in his application that he should be awarded the Combat Medical Badge.  Item 22 (Military Occupational Specialties) of the applicant’s DA Form 20 shows that he possessed a medical MOS.  Item 38 (Record of Assignments) of this same form shows that he served as a Medical Specialist and Medical Sergeant with HHC, 2nd Battalion, 39th Infantry Regiment, 9th Infantry Division during his tour in Vietnam.  However, there is no evidence in the applicant’s military personnel records which conclusively shows that he was personally present and under fire while this infantry unit was in contact with the enemy and engaged in ground combat.    

9.  During a review of the applicant’s records, it was determined that he is entitled to additional awards and decorations that are not shown on his DD Form 214.

10.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 does not show that he was awarded the Army Commendation Medal.  However, he was awarded the Army Commendation Medal by Headquarters, 9th Infantry Division General Orders Number 8608, dated 5 July 1969.

11.  The applicant’s records show that he served 2 years of continuous enlisted active duty service from 6 March 1969 to 5 March 1970.  However, his DD Form 214 does not show that he was awarded the Good Conduct Medal for this period of service.  His conduct and efficiency were rated as "excellent" or “unknown” for the entire period of this qualifying period of service, and there is no derogatory information in the available records which would be a disqualifying factor for this period of active duty service for award of the Good Conduct Medal.

12.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) lists the unit awards received by units serving in 
Vietnam.  This document shows that at the time of the applicant’s assignment to the 9th Infantry Division, the division was cited for award of Meritorious Unit Commendation by Department of the Army General Orders Number 37, dated 1970.  

13.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 does not show that he was awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Silver Star.  However, Headquarters, United States Army Vietnam letter, dated 25 September 1969, authorized the applicant to accept and wear the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Silver Star which was presented to him by the Government of the Republic of Vietnam.

14.  The applicant’s records essentially show that he was awarded the Vietnam Service Medal, but it does not show that he was awarded any bronze service stars to signify campaign participation credit.  Paragraph 2-13 of Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) contains the regulatory guidance on the Vietnam Service Medal.  It states in pertinent part, that a bronze service star is authorized with this award for each Vietnam campaign a member is credited with participating in.  Table B-1 contains a list of Vietnam campaigns, and it shows that during his tenure of assignment, the applicant was credited with participating in the Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase V campaign, the Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase VI campaign, the TET 69 Counteroffensive campaign, and the Vietnam Summer-Fall 1969 campaign.  

15.  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.  This regulation also provides that there are no time limitations on requests for award of the Purple Heart.

16.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that the Combat Medical Badge is awarded to medical department personnel (colonel and below) who are assigned or attached to a medical unit of company or smaller size that is organic to an infantry unit of brigade, regimental or smaller size which is engaged in active ground combat.  Battle participation credit is not sufficient; the infantry unit must have been in contact with the enemy and the Soldier must have been personally present and under fire during such ground combat.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that he should be awarded the Purple Heart and the Combat Medical Badge.

2.  The applicant’s statement indicating that he removed shrapnel from his leg and treated his wound himself, as well as the statements from a former Soldier and a person claiming to be the battalion surgeon for the 2nd Battalion, 39th Infantry Regiment were carefully considered.  However, while the Board does not doubt the veracity of the applicant’s claim to entitlement to award of the Purple Heart, there is no evidence in the applicant’s military records which shows that he sustained wounds as a result of hostile action, and that he was treated by medical personnel for those wounds, and that this treatment was made a matter of official record.  Regrettably, absent such evidence, there is insufficient basis for awarding the Purple Heart to the applicant in this case.  

3.  Although the applicant possessed and served in a medical MOS with the 2nd Battalion, 39th Infantry Regiment in Vietnam, there is no evidence that his unit was in contact with the enemy, and that he was personally present and under fire during any such ground combat.  In view of the foregoing, there is insufficient evidence upon which to award the Combat Medical Badge to the applicant in this case.  

4.  General orders awarded the applicant the Army Commendation Medal which is not shown on his DD Form 214; therefore, he is entitled to correction of his military records to show the award of the Army Commendation Medal.  

5.  The applicant served 2 years of continuous enlisted active duty service from 
6 March 1969 to 5 March 1970.  His conduct and efficiency were rated as "excellent" or “unknown” for the entire period of this qualifying period of service, and there is no derogatory information in the available records which could be a disqualifying factor for this period of active duty service for award of the Good Conduct Medal.  Therefore, he is entitled to award of the Good Conduct Medal for the period 6 March 1968 to 5 March 1970, and correction of his military records to show the award of the Good Conduct Medal.

6.  General orders awarded the Meritorious Unit Commendation to the 9th Infantry Division while the applicant was assigned to the division.  Therefore, he is entitled to award of the Meritorious Unit Commendation, and correction of his military records to show this unit award.   

7.  The applicant was authorized by Headquarters, United States Army Vietnam letter, dated 25 September 1969, to accept and wear the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Silver Star which was presented to him by the Government of the Republic of Vietnam.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his military records to show the award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Silver Star.

8.  The applicant participated in four campaigns during his tour in Vietnam.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his military records to show four bronze service stars to be affixed to his already awarded Vietnam Service Medal.

9.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 5 March 1970; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 
4 March 1973.  Although the applicant did not file within the ABCMR's statute of limitations, it is appropriate to waive failure to timely file based on the partial relief being granted in this case, and the fact that there is no time limitation on requests for award of the Purple Heart.



BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

__MT ___  ___JH___  __DL ___  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.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by:

a.  showing the award of the Army Commendation Medal;

b.  awarding him the Good Conduct Medal for the period 6 March 1968 to 5 March 1970 while serving as a specialist five;

c.  awarding him the Meritorious Unit Commendation;

d.  showing the award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Silver Star; and

e.  showing four bronze service stars to be affixed to his already awarded Vietnam Service Medal.

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 awarding the Purple Heart or the Combat Medical Badge to the applicant.  




______Marla Troup_______
          CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060007116
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
20070221
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
AR 15-185
ISSUES         1.
107.0015.0000
2.
107.0113.0000
3.
107.0056.0000
4
107.0034.0000
5.
107.0094.0000
6.
107.0073.0000 (add bronze service stars)
7.
110.0400.0000