RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	


	BOARD DATE:	  5 April 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060011556 


	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.


	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, to have the Combat Medical Badge (CMB) added to his separation document (DD Form 214).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that his separation document (DD Form 214) does not reflect his award of the CMB.  He also indicates that he believes that he is entitled to this award for working in the field as a medic in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN).

3.  The applicant indicates that he submitted a copy of his separation document in support of his application.  However it was not included with his application when it was received by the Board. 

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which occurred on 19 September 1969, the date of his separation.  The application submitted in this case is dated 27 July 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 that he was inducted into the Army of the United States (AUS) and entered active duty on 21 September 1967.  He was trained in, awarded, and served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 91B
(Medical Specialist), and the highest rank he attained while serving on active duty was specialist four (SP4).  

4.  The applicant's Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows he served in the RVN from 28 February 1968 to 27 February 1969.  Item 38 (Record of Assignments) shows that during his RVN tour, he was assigned to the 
1st Medical Company performing the duties of an ambulatory orderly and driver.

5.  Item 41 (Awards and Decorations) of the applicant's DA Form 20 shows he earned the following awards during his active duty tenure:  National Defense Service Medal (NDSM); Vietnam Service Medal (VSM); RVN Campaign Medal (RVNCM) with Device 1960; Driver's Badge; and 2 Overseas Service Bars.  

6.  The applicant's Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) is void of any orders, or other documents that indicate he was ever recommended for, or awarded either the CMB by proper authority while he was serving in the RVN.  

7.  On 19 September 1969, the applicant was honorably separated from active duty after completing 1 year, 11 months, and 29 days of active military service.  The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time confirms he earned the following awards during his active duty tenure:  Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM); NDSM; VSM; RVNCM; and the Driver's Badge.  The CMB was not included in the list of awards contained on the separation document and the applicant authenticated the DD Form 214 with his signature on the date of his separation.  

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) contains the Army’s awards policy.  Paragraph 2-13 contains guidance on the VSM.  It states, in pertinent part, that a bronze service star is authorized with this award for each RVN campaign a member is credited with participating in.  A silver service star is used to denote 5 bronze service stars.

9.  Table B-1 of the awards regulation contains a list of RVN campaigns.  It shows that during his tenure of assignment in the RVN, the applicant was credited with participating in the TET Counteroffensive, Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase IV, Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase V, Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase VI, and TET 69 Counteroffensive campaigns.  

10.  Chapter 8 of the awards regulation contains the policy on award of badges and tabs of United States origin.  Paragraph 8-7 of the awards regulation contains the policy and outlines the eligibility criteria for award of the CMB.  It states, in pertinent part, that a CMB may be awarded to eligible medical personnel who are assigned or attached by appropriate orders to an infantry unit of brigade, regimental, or smaller size, or to a medical unit of company or smaller size, organic to an infantry unit of brigade or smaller size, during any period the infantry unit is engaged in actual ground combat, provided they are personally present and under fire during such ground combat.  Combat service alone does not provide a basis to award the CMB.


11.  Department of the Army (DA) General Order (GO) Number 8, dated in 1974, authorized the award of the RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation to all personnel assigned to the RVN from 8 February 1962 through 28 March 1973. 

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s claim of entitlement to CMB based on his field service in the RVN was carefully considered.  However, by regulation, in order to qualify for the CMB, a MEDIC must be assigned or attached to an infantry unit of brigade, regimental, or smaller size, or to a medical unit of company or smaller size, organic to an infantry unit of brigade or smaller size, during any period the infantry unit is engaged in actual ground combat, provided they are personally present and under fire during such ground combat.

2.  The evidence of record fails to confirm the applicant performed combat medic duties with a qualifying infantry unit while actively engaged in combat.  There are no orders, or other documents on file to show that the applicant was ever recommended for, or awarded either the CMB while he was serving on active duty.  Further, the CMB is not included in the list of awards contained on his 
DA Form 20 or his DD Form 214, which he authenticated with his signature on the date of his separation.  In effect, his signature was his verification that the information contained on the DD Form 214, to include the list of awards, was correct at the time the document was prepared and issued.  As a result, the regulatory burden of proof necessary to support award of the CMB has not been satisfied in this case.  

3.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 19 September 1969, the date of his separation.  Therefore, the time for him to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 18 September 1972.  He failed to 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.

4.  The evidence of record does show that based on his service and campaign participation in the RVN, the applicant is entitled to the RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, and 1 silver service star with his VSM.  The omission of these awards from his record and separation document is an administrative matter that does not require Board action to correct.  Therefore, 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 3 of the BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION section below.
BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__LDS __  __JCR    _  __SWF__  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.

3.  The Board determined that administrative error in the records of the individual concerned should be corrected.  Therefore, the Board requests that the CMSD-St. Louis administratively correct the records of the individual concerned to show his entitlement to the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation and 1 silver service star with his Vietnam Service Medal; and by providing him a corrected separation document that includes these changes. 




_____Linda D. Simmons____
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060011556
SUFFIX

RECON
NO
DATE BOARDED
2007/04/05
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
HD
DATE OF DISCHARGE
1969/09/19
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR 635-200
DISCHARGE REASON
ETS
BOARD DECISION
DENY with Note
REVIEW AUTHORITY
Mr. Schwartz
ISSUES         1.
107.0113
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.