RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  24 April 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060015217 


	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. Gerard W. Schwartz

Acting Director

M. Michael J. Fowler

Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:


Mr. James E. Vick

Chairperson

Mr. Patrick H. McGann Jr.

Member

Mr. Gerald J. Purcell

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 correction of his records to show award of the Army Commendation Medal, the Purple Heart, and the Army Good Conduct Medal. 

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that the above awards were not entered on his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) with the period ending 8 September 1971 due to inexperienced administrative personnel completing the DD Form 214 during his out-processing. 

3.  The applicant provides his DD Form 214; two DD Forms 215 (Correction to DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge); and a DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) with an audit date of 26 August 1970. 

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which occurred on 
8 September 1971.  The application submitted in this case is dated 16 October 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 requested correction of his records to show award of the Army Commendation Medal.  There are no orders or other evidence authorizing award of this decoration to the applicant.  In the absence of a proper award authority for this decoration, the applicant may request award of the Commendation Medal under the provisions of Section 1130, Title 10, United States Code.  He has been notified by separate correspondence of the procedures for applying for the decoration under section 1130 and, as a result, it will not be discussed further in this Record of Proceedings.
 
4.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 9 September 1964 and successfully completed basic training and advanced individual training.  He was 

awarded military occupational specialty 94B (Cook).  On 8 September 1965, he was honorably discharged and immediately reenlisted on 9 September 1965 for a six year term of service after completing 1 year of creditable active service with no time lost.  

5.  The applicant arrived in Vietnam and was assigned to A Company, 15th Medical Battalion, 1st Cavalry Division on or about 2 August 1966.  He was transferred to the 560th Military Police Company on or about 13 March 1968.  He was transferred to the 615th Military Police Company on or about 12 June 1968.  

6.  On 26 January 1969, the applicant was convicted, in accordance with his pleas, by a summary court-martial of disobeying a lawful order.  His sentence consisted of a forfeiture of $180.00 per month for one month and reduction to the rank of Specialist Fourth Class/E-4.

7.  On 24 May 1969, the applicant departed Vietnam.  

8.  A Headquarters, U.S. Army Reception Station, Fort Bragg, North Carolina memorandum, dated 7 July 1969, Subject: Request for General Orders prepared by an Assistant Adjutant, was sent to the Commanding Officer of the 95th Military Police Battalion requesting copies of General Orders awarding the applicant the Army Good Conduct Medal, the Purple Heart, and the Army Commendation Medal.

9.  The Assistant Adjutant stated that "EM's 201 file does not contain any General Orders authorizing the above awards however item 41, DA Form 
20 pertaining to Sp4 F_____ has been annotated to reflect the award of these medals.  The authority entered on DA Form 20 is incorrect."  The applicant's records do not contain a reply to the request.

10.  The applicant was honorably discharged from active duty on 8 September 1971 after completing 6 years of creditable active on that enlistment with no lost time.

11.  His DD Form 214 with the ending period 8 September 1971 shows he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal.

12.  There are no general orders in the applicant’s service personnel records that show he was awarded the Purple Heart.  There also is no evidence in his service personnel records that shows that he was wounded or treated for wounds as a result of hostile action in Vietnam.  The applicant's name is not listed on the Vietnam Casualty Roster.  

13.  Item 38 (Record of Assignments) of the applicant's DA Form 20 shows the applicant received an "Unsatisfactory" conduct and efficiency rating for the period 16 September 1964 through 15 December 1964, an "Unsatisfactory" efficiency rating for the period 21 March 1965 through 11 April 1965, a "Good" conduct and efficiency rating for the period 13 March 1968 through 11 June 1968, a "Good" efficiency rating for the period 12 June 1968 through 13 September 1968, a "Good" conduct and efficiency rating for the period 10 October 1968 through 
16 January 1969, a "Good" conduct rating for the period 30 June 1969 through 16 September 1969, a "Satisfactory" conduct rating for the period 17 September 1969 through 12 July 1970, and a "Good" conduct and efficiency rating for the period 11 February 1971 through 8 September 1971.  

14.  Item 40 (Wounds) does not show the applicant was wounded.  Item 41 (Awards and Decorations) shows award of the Army Good Conduct Medal, the Purple Heart, and the Army Commendation Medal.  However, the regulatory authorities listed for the awards are invalid.

15.  The applicant's Army Medical Treatment Records are unavailable.  

16.  Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Military Awards), in effect at the time, provided the policy and criteria concerning individual military decorations.  It stated that the Army Good Conduct Medal was awarded for each 3 years of continuous enlisted active Federal military service completed on or after 27 August 1940 and, for the first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June 1950 of less than 3 years but more than 1 year.  At the time, a Soldier's conduct and efficiency ratings must have been rated as "excellent" for the entire period of qualifying service and there must have been no convictions by court-martial.

16.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) 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 further states that there is no time limit on submission of requests for award of the Purple Heart.

17.  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 A Company, 15th Medical Battalion, 1st Cavalry Division, it was cited for award of the Valorous Unit Award for the period 2 August 1966 through 12 March 
1968 based on Headquarters, Department of the Army General Orders Number 6, dated 1974.
18.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 shows that, at the time of the applicant’s assignment to the 560th Military Police Company, it was awarded the 
Meritorious Unit Commendation for the period 1 January 1968 through 
30 September 1968 based on Headquarters, Department of the Army General Orders Number 70, dated 1969.

19.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 shows that, at the time of the applicant’s assignment to the 615th Military Police Company, it was awarded the Meritorious Unit Commendation for the period 9 February 1968 through 
31 December 1968 based on Headquarters, Department of the Army General Orders Number 39, dated 1970.

20.  Department of the Army General Orders Number 8, 1974, announced award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation to Headquarters, U. S. Military Assistance Command and its subordinate units during the period 8 February 1962 to 28 March 1973 and to Headquarters, U. S. Army Vietnam and its subordinate units during the period 20 July 1965 to 
28 March 1973.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Evidence of records shows the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on
9 September 1964 and was honorably discharged on 8 September 1965 after completing 1 year of creditable active service.  On 9 September 1965, he reenlisted for a six year term of service.  He was honorably discharged on 
8 September 1971 after completing 6 years of creditable active service.

2.  Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time, specifically stated that the Army Good Conduct Medal was awarded for each 3 years of continuous enlisted active Federal military service completed and that a Soldier's conduct and efficiency ratings must have been rated as "excellent" for the entire period of qualifying service and there must have been no convictions by court-martial.  Unfortunately, the applicant's records shows that he received several disqualifying ratings (i.e. other than "excellent") and a summary court-martial during his second term of which make him ineligible for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.

3.  The applicant's DA Form 20 shows he was awarded the Purple Heart.  However, the regulatory authority listed for this award is invalid.  There are no orders in the applicant's service personnel records that show he was awarded the Purple Heart.  There is no evidence in the available records and the applicant has not provided evidence that shows he was injured as a result of hostile action. In the absence of military records which show the applicant was injured as a result of hostile action, there is an insufficient basis for award of the Purple Heart in this case.

4.  The applicant was assigned to two units during a period of time these units were each awarded one Meritorious Unit Commendation.  He was assigned to a unit that was awarded the Valorous Unit Award.  His DD Form 214 should be amended to add these unit awards.

5.  All units in Vietnam were awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation.  His DD Form 214 should be amended to add this award.

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.

7.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 8 September 1971.  Therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 
7 September 1974.  Although the applicant did not file within the ABCMR's statute of limitations, it is appropriate to waive failure to timely file in this case based on the fact there is no statute of limitations on requests for award of the Purple Heart.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__JEV    _  __PHM__  ___GJP_  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.  The Board determined that administrative errors in the records of the individual concerned should be corrected.  Therefore, the Board requests that the CMSD-St. Louis administratively correct the DD Form 214 for the period ending 
8 September 1971 of the individual concerned to add two awards of the Meritorious Unit Commendation, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, and the Valorous Unit Award.




__      _James E. Vick_      _
          CHAIRPERSON 




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060015217
SUFFIX

RECON

DATE BOARDED
24 APRIL 2007
TYPE OF DISCHARGE

DATE OF DISCHARGE

DISCHARGE AUTHORITY

DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
DENY 
REVIEW AUTHORITY
MR. SCHWARTZ
ISSUES         1.
107.0020.0000
2.
107.0056.0000
3.
107.0015.0000
4.

5.

6.