RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  17 May 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060015238 


	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, award of the Bronze Star Medal (BSM) 
1st Oak Leaf Cluster, Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) 1st Oak Leaf Cluster, Meritorious Unit Commendation (MUC), and reconsideration of his request to be awarded the Purple Heart (PH).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that when his unit, the 1st Infantry Division, returned from the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) and was reassigned to Fort Riley, Kansas, all of his hold baggage was sent up north.  He states that by the time he received his baggage, it had been broken into and most of his personal records went missing.   He further states that although he has never been able to recreate his records, he has managed to find a few of the original orders and documentation.  He now requests his records be put in order and that his awards be added to his separation document (DD Form 214).

3.  The applicant provides the following documents in support of his application:  Application for Remission of Fees for Child of a Disabled Veteran; ARCOM Citation; Headquarters, United States Army Support Command General Orders (GO) Number (#) 606, dated 17 June 1970; Headquarters, 1st Infantry Division Support Command Letter; ARCOM 1st Oak Leaf Cluster Citation; and BSM Citations. 

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice that occurred on 27 June 1970, the date of his release from active duty.  The application submitted in this case is dated 17 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.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's request for the PH by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number
AC98-06469 on 23 April 1998.
4.  During its original review of the applicant's request for the PH, the Board found no evidence of record to show that the applicant was wounded or injured as a result of enemy action or that he was ever recommended for or awarded the PH by proper authority while serving on active duty.  

5.  The applicant’s record shows he was inducted into the Army and entered active duty on 16 July 1968.  He was trained in, awarded, and served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 71B (Clerk Typist), and the highest rank he attained while serving on active duty was specialist five (SP5).

6.  The applicant’s Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows he served in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) from 29 June 1969 through 28 June 1970. It also shows that during his RVN tour, he was assigned to Headquarters and Company A, 701st Maintenance Battalion, 1st Infantry Division, from 9 July 
1969 through 16 April 1970, performing duties in MOS 71B as a clerk typist and 71H as a personnel specialist; and from 17 April through 24 June 1970, he was assigned to Headquarters and Headquarters Detachment (HHD), 240th Quartermaster Battalion, performing duties in MOS 71H as a personnel management specialist. 

7.  Item 38 of the applicant’s DA Form 20 shows that he received "Excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings at each of his active duty assignments.  Further, his Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) contains no derogatory information and there is no documented record of a disqualification from any of the applicant's active duty commanders that would have precluded him from receiving the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM).  

8.  Item 40 (Wounds) of the applicant's DA Form 20 is blank, and the list of authorized awards contained in Item 41 (Awards and Decorations) does not include the PH.  Item 41 does show that during his active duty tenure, he earned the National Defense Service Medal (NDSM), Vietnam Service Medal (VSM), ARCOM, BSM, RVN Campaign Medal with 1960 Device, and the Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar.  

9.  The applicant's MPRJ contains a Report of Medical Examination (SF 88), which was completed on the applicant during his separation processing.  This document is void of any indication that he was ever wounded in combat action, or that he was treated for a combat-related wound or injury.  The MPRJ is void of any orders or other documents that indicate he was ever wounded in action, or that he was ever treated for a combat related wound or injury by military medical personnel.  Further, there is no indication that he was ever recommended for, or awarded the PH by proper authority while serving on active duty.  

10.  The applicant's MPRJ contains Headquarters, 1st Infantry Division, GO
#4726, dated 21 March 1970.  These orders awarded him the BSM, for his meritorious achievement in connection with military operations against a hostile force during the period 11 November 1969 through 10 February 1970.  It also contains Headquarters, United States Army Support Command, GO # 606, dated 17 June 1970, which awarded him the ARCOM 1st Oak Leaf Cluster, for his meritorious service in connection with military operations against a hostile force during the period June 1969 through June 1970.

11.  The applicant provides a Recommendation for MUC 2nd Oak Leaf Cluster, which is undated and unsigned.  This document recommends that the MUC 2nd Oak Leaf Cluster be awarded to the applicant's unit (701st Maintenance Battalion), for meritorious service during the period 1 July 1968 through 31 July 1969.  

12.  On 27 June 1970, the applicant was honorably released from active duty after completing a total of 1 year, 11 months, and 12 days of active military service.  Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the DD Form 214 he was issued shows he earned the following awards:  NDSM; VSM; ARCOM, BSM, and Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar.  

13. The applicant provides two BSM Certificates, dated 20 March 1970 and 
2 April 1970, which both show he was awarded the BSM for his meritorious achievement in ground operations against hostile forces for the period
11 November 1969 through 10 February 1970.  

14.  In connection with the processing of this case, a member of the Board staff reviewed the Department of the Army (DA) Vietnam Casualty Roster.  The applicant’s name was not included on this roster.  

15.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy and criteria concerning individual military awards.  Paragraph 2-8 contains the regulatory guidance pertaining to awarding the PH.  It states, in pertinent part, that in order to award a PH there must be evidence that a member was wounded or injured as a result of enemy action.  The wound or injury for which the PH is being awarded must have required treatment by a medical officer; this treatment must be supported by medical treatment records that were made a matter of official record. 

16.  Paragraph 2-13 of the awards regulation contains guidance on the VSM.  It states, in pertinent part, that a bronze service star is authorized for each RVN campaign a member is credited with participating in.  
17.  Paragraph 3-13 of the awards regulation contains guidance on award of the BSM.  It states, in pertinent part, that it is awarded to any person who, while serving in any capacity in or with the Army of the United States after 6 December 1941, distinguished himself or herself by heroic or meritorious achievement or service.  

18.  Chapter 4 of the awards regulation prescribes the policy for award of the 
AGCM.  It states, in pertinent part, that the AGCM is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency and fidelity during a qualifying period of active duty enlisted service.  This period is 3 years, except in those cases when the period for the first award ends with the termination of a period of Federal military service, in which case a period of more than 1 year is a qualifying period.  Although there is no automatic entitlement to the AGCM, disqualification must be justified.  

19.  Paragraph 9-13 of the awards regulation contains guidance on the RVN Campaign Medal.  It states, in pertinent part, that it is authorized for six months of service in the RVN during the period from 1 March 1961 to 28 March 1973.  It further states this award is issued with a Device 1960. 

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

21.  Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) establishes the eligibility of individual members for campaign participation credit, assault landing credit, and unit citation badges awarded during the Vietnam Conflict.  It confirms that during his tenure of assignment in the RVN, participation credit was granted for the Vietnam Summer-Fall 1969, Vietnam Winter-Spring 1970, and the Sanctuary Counteroffensive campaigns.  Although the unit received the MUC for other periods, it did not receive this award during the applicant's assignment tenure.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that he was awarded the ARCOM 1st Oak Leaf Cluster was carefully considered and found to have merit.  The applicant's record contains orders confirming the applicant was awarded the ARCOM 1st Oak Leaf 
Cluster for meritorious service in connection with military operations against a hostile force during the period June 1969 through June 1970.  Therefore, it would be appropriate to add this award to his separation document at this time. 

2.  The applicant's record also confirms that he received "Excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings at all of his active duty assignments.  Further, the record is void of any derogatory information or a specific disqualification by any of the active duty unit commanders for whom he served.  As a result, it would be appropriate to award him the first award of the AGCM, for his qualifying period of honorable active duty service from 16 July 1968 through 27 June 1970.  

3.  The record also confirms that based on his service and campaign participation in the RVN, the applicant is entitled to the RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, RVN Campaign Medal with 1960 Device, and 3 bronze service stars to be affixed to his Vietnam Service Medal.  Therefore, it would be appropriate to add these awards to his separation document.  

4.  The applicant's contention that he was awarded the BSM 1st Oak Leaf Cluster was carefully considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence to support this claim.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant was awarded the BSM for meritorious achievement for the period of service 11 November 1969 through 
10 February 1970 in Headquarters, 1st Infantry Division, GO# 4726, dated 
21 March 1970.  Although the applicant provides two BSM Certificates, both of these documents award the same BSM for the same period.  Therefore, it is clear there were duplicate certificates issued for the same award. 

5.  The applicant's claim of entitlement to award of the PH was again carefully considered.  However, by regulation, in order to award the PH it is necessary to establish that the wound or injury for which the PH is being awarded was received as a direct result of, or was caused by enemy action. The applicant's record is void of any orders, or other documents that indicate he was ever wounded in action, or that show he was ever recommended for or awarded the PH by proper authority while serving on active duty.  

6.  Further, Item 40 of the applicant's DA Form 20 is blank, indicating he was never wounded or injured in action.  His name is not included on the Vietnam Casualty Roster, the official DA list of RVN battle casualties and the PH is not included in the list of awards contained on 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 separation document was prepared and issued.  

7.  Absent any evidence of record showing the applicant was ever wounded in action or treated for a combat related wound or injury while serving on active duty, the regulatory burden of proof necessary to support award of the PH has 
again not been satisfied in this case.  Therefore, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support amendment of the original Board decision on this issue.  

8.  The applicant's contention of entitlement to the MUC and the memorandum he submitted in support of this request was also carefully considered.  However, the evidence of record confirms the applicant's unit in the RVN did not receive the MUC during his tenure of assignment.  Therefore, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support adding this award to his DD Form 214 at this time

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

__x__  __x ___  __x _  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 and to excuse failure to timely file.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: 

	a.  showing he earned the Army Commendation Medal 1st Oak Leaf Cluster;

b.  awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal, for his qualifying period of active duty service from 16 July 1968 through 27 June 1970; 

c.  amending his 27 June 1970 DD Form 214 by deleting the current list of awards in Item 24 and replacing it with the entry "Bronze Star Medal, Army Commendation Medal 1st Oak Leaf Cluster, National Defense Service Medal, Army Good Conduct Medal, Vietnam Service Medal with 3 bronze service stars, Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with 1960 Device, Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, and Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar; and 

d.  providing him a correction to his separation document that includes these awards.  
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 award of the Purple Heart, Bronze Star Medal 1st Oak Leaf Cluster, and Meritorious Unit Commendation.




________
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060015238
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
2007/05/17
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
HD
DATE OF DISCHARGE
1970/06/27
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR635-200 . . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
GRANT-PARTIAL
REVIEW AUTHORITY
Mr. Schwartz
ISSUES         1.
107
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.