RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  22 February 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060010874 


	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. Joyce A. Wright

Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:


Mr. Mark D. Manning

Chairperson

Mr. John T. Meixell

Member

Mr. Qawiy A. Sabree

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, in effect, correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show that he was awarded the Good Conduct Medal (1st Award), two awards of the Purple Heart (correctly known as the Purple Heart with 1st Oak Leaf Cluster), and the Air Medal, (second through the third award).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that the Good Conduct Medal (1st Award), the Purple Heart (1st Oak Leaf Cluster), and the Air Medal (second through the third award) are not shown on his DD Form 214.  

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 and a copy of orders awarding him the Good Conduct Medal (First Award) in support of his request.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice which occurred on 27 April 1970, the date of his release from active duty.  The application submitted in this case is dated 25 July 2006 but was received on 2 August 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 record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army on 24 September 1968.  The applicant successfully completed basic combat training and advanced individual training at Fort Lewis, Washington.  On completion of his OSUT (one station unit training), he was awarded the military occupational specialty (MOS), 11B, Light Weapons Infantryman.






4.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal; the Vietnam Service Medal; the Combat Infantryman Badge; the Purple Heart; the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal; the Army Commendation Medal; the Bronze Star Medal; two overseas service bars; the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge, with Rifle Bar (M-14); and the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge, with Rifle Bar (M-16).  His DD Form 214 does not show any additional awards.

5.  The applicant provided a copy of Headquarters, 101st Airborne Division (Airmobile), General Orders Number 3934, dated 7 April 1970, which awarded him the Good Conduct Medal (First Award) for the period 24 September 1968 to DOSOA (date of separation on or about) 27 April 1970.

6.  Item 40, of his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record), shows the entry "Frag (fragmentation) Wound Left Arm 9Jun69" (9 June 1969).  Item 41 (Awards and Decorations) does show the Purple Heart.  

7.  There are no orders in the applicant’s service personnel records which show that he was awarded two awards of the Purple Heart.  There also is no evidence in his records that shows he was wounded or treated for wounds as a result of hostile action on two occasions while serving in Vietnam.

8.  The applicant’s name appears on the Vietnam Casualty List for a wound received on 9 June 1969 during his service in Vietnam as a result of enemy action.  It failed to show that he was listed for any additional wounds.

9.  There are no flight hours recorded in the applicant’s personnel records.  There also is no evidence that he met the qualifications for or was recommended for award of the Air Medal. 

10.  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 the result of hostile action, the wound must have required treatment, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.  This regulation also provides that there is no statute of limitations on requests for award of the Purple Heart.





11.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that the Air Medal is awarded in time of war for heroism and for meritorious achievement or service while participating in aerial flight.  This award is primarily intended for personnel on flying status, but may also be awarded to those personnel whose combat duties require them to fly: for example, personnel in the attack elements of units involved in air-land assaults against an armed enemy.  As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required.

12.  U.S Army Vietnam (USARV) Regulation 672-1 (Decorations and Awards) provided, in pertinent part, guidelines for award of the Air Medal.  It established that passenger personnel who did not participate in an air assault were not eligible for the award based upon sustained operations.  It defined terms and provided guidelines for the award based upon the number and types of missions 
or hours.  Twenty-five Category I missions (air assault and equally dangerous missions) and accrual of a minimum of 25 hours of flight time while engaged in Category I missions was the standard established for which sustained operations were deemed worthy of recognition by an award of the Air Medal.  However, the regulation was clear that these guidelines were considered only a departure point.  Nothing created an entitlement to the award.

13.  The applicant requested correction of his records to show award of the Air Medal.  Section 1130, Title 10, United States Code provides that the Service concerned will review a proposal for the award of, or upgrading of, a decoration that would not otherwise be authorized to be awarded based upon time limitations previously established by law.  Requests for consideration of awards should be supported by sworn affidavits, eyewitness statements, certificates and related documents.  Corroborating evidence is best provided by commanders, leaders and fellow comrades who had personal knowledge of the circumstances and events relative to the request.  A request for award not previously submitted in a timely fashion will only be considered under this provision if the request has been referred to the Service Secretary from a Member of Congress.  The applicant has been notified by separate correspondence of the procedure for applying for award of the Air Medal under Section 1130 and, as a result, it will not be discussed further in this Record of Proceedings.

14.  While the applicant was assigned to Vietnam he participated in three campaigns.  Army regulation 600-8-22 provides that a bronze service star is authorized for the Vietnam Service Medal for participation in each campaign. 



15.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 shows that the applicant's unit was cited for award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, by Department of the Army General Orders Number 43, dated 1970; and the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation, by DAGO Number 48, dated 1971, while he was assigned to the unit.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of records shows that the applicant was awarded the Good Conduct Medal (First Award) for the period 24 September 1968 to on or about 27 April 1970.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his records to show this award.

2.  There are no orders officially awarding the applicant two awards of the Purple Heart and there are no medical records available to show that he was treated twice for wounds as a result of hostile action.  The applicant's name is shown on the Vietnam Casualty list only once for the wound he sustained on 9 June 1969 for which he was awarded a Purple Heart.  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to award a second award of the Purple Heart, correctly known as the Purple Heart (1st Oak Leaf Cluster).  

3.  The applicant's DD Form 214 shows that he was awarded the Vietnam Service Medal.  However, he participated in three campaigns and he is therefore, entitled to three bronze service stars to be affixed to the already-awarded Vietnam Service Medal.

4.  The applicant's unit was cited for award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation and the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation, while he was a member of the unit.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his records to show these unit awards.

5.   Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 27 April 1970; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 26 April 1973.  Although the applicant did not file within the ABCMR's 3-year statute of limitations, it is appropriate to waive failure to timely file based on the fact there is no statute of limitations on requests for award of the Purple Heart




6.  Evidence shows that the applicant’s records contain administrative error which does not require action by the Board.  Therefore, administrative correction of the applicant’s records will be accomplished by the Case Management Support Division (CMSD), St. Louis, Missouri, as outlined by the Board in paragraph 2 of the BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION section below.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__MDM__  ___J____  __QAS__  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  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 for award of the Purple Heart (1st Oak Leaf Cluster).

2.  The Board determined that administrative error in the records of the individual should be corrected.  Therefore, the Board requests that the CMSD-St. Louis administratively correct the records of the individual concerned to show award of the Good Conduct Medal (First Award) for the period 24 September 1968 to 27 April 1970; the Vietnam Service Medal, with three bronze service stars; the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal, First Class Unit Citation; and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross, with Palm Unit Citation. 




____    Mark D. Manning____
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060010874
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
20070222
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
HD
DATE OF DISCHARGE
19700427
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR635-200
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
GRANT//DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.
107
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.