RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  25 October 2007 
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070006186 


	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.


Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano

Director

Ms. Antoinette Farley

Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:


Ms. Linda D. Simmons

Chairperson

Mr. Scott W. Faught

Member

Mr. Roland S. Venable 

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 award of the Purple Heart.  

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was a medical corpsman for a mobile artillery line unit in a firebase on the perimeter of Lai Khe, in the Republic of Vietnam.  The applicant further states that on 25 February 1969, his line unit was hit with an intense barrage of rockets and mortar fire.  The applicant continues that there were many men wounded and he made three trips to different howitzer sections to tend to the wounded.  The applicant continues that during his running from bunker to bunker he was hit with shrapnel from either rocket or mortar rounds.  

3.  The applicant contends that after the men were evacuated out of the area and the shelling had stopped he slept until daylight.  The applicant further continues that he awoke and discovered small shrapnel pieces had burned through his shirt and peppered his chest, arm, and leg areas.

4.  The applicant contends that he went to the base camp hospital and was examined by the doctor who told him he had been hit by small pieces of shrapnel from either a rocket or mortar explosion.  The applicant continues that the doctor told him that the pieces of shrapnel could be removed or he could wait until the pieces eventually work their way out on their own. 

5.  The applicant adds that he was awarded an Army Commendation Medal for "Valor" based on his actions on 25 February 1969.  The applicant continues that nothing was ever written or recorded about his wounds which he admits could have been for various reasons.  The applicant concludes that the medal means something to him now and wishes he had it.  

6.  The applicant provides a copy of General Orders Number 3467, dated 4 May 1969, showing award of the Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) with "V" Device; his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge, dated 4 January 1971 (which appears to have been altered to add additional awards); and his DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), dated 30 November 2004, adding the ARCOM with Oak Leaf Cluster and with “V” Device, in support of this application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  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 also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 4 April 1968.  After completion of basic and advanced individual training, he was awarded military occupational specialty 91B (Medical Specialist).  The applicant's record shows that he served in the Republic of Vietnam during the period 17 September 1968 to 27 August 1969.  

3.  The applicant's record shows he was assigned to Company B, 1st Medical Battalion, 1st Infantry Division during the period 17 September 1968 through
16 February 1969.  The applicant's record also shows he was then assigned to Headquarters and Headquarters Service Battery, 1st Battalion, 5th Artillery, 1st Infantry Division during the period 17 February 1969 through 31 May 1969.  The applicant's record shows he was further assigned to Headquarters and Headquarters Service Battery, 8th Battalion, 6th Artillery, 1st Infantry Division during the period 1 June 1969 through 26 August 1969. 

4.  The applicant's DD Form 214 shows that on 4 January 1971, he was honorably released from active duty and transferred to the United States Army Reserve Control Group (Annual Training) to complete his remaining service obligation.  The applicant's DD Form 214 also shows he completed a total of 2 years, 9 months, and 1 day of creditable Federal military service with no time lost and the highest rank he attained while serving on active duty was specialist four/pay grade E-4.

5.  Item 24 (Decoration, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant's DD Form 214 does not show award of the Purple Heart.  

6.  There are no general orders in the applicant's records to show he was awarded the Purple Heart.  

7.  There are no medical records in the applicant's official military personnel file which shows he sustained wounds as a result of hostile action or that show he was treated for wounds sustained as a result of hostile action.

8.  The applicant's name does not appear on the Vietnam Casualty Roster for injuries sustained as a result of hostile action while in the Republic of Vietnam.

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part, that the Purple Heart is awarded for a wound sustained while in action against and enemy or 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 by military medical personnel, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.

10.  The applicant's record shows he was issued a DD Form 215, dated 30 November 2004.  The DD Form 215 corrected item 24 of the applicant’s DD Form 214 to add the Army Commendation Medal with one Bronze Oak Leaf Cluster and with "V" Device.

11.  Review of the applicant's record indicates entitlement to additional awards that are not shown on his DD Form 214.

12.  Item 38 (Record of Assignments) of the applicant's DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows that all of his recorded conduct and efficiency ratings were excellent throughout his tour of service.

13.  Item 41 (Awards and Decorations) of the applicant's DA Form 20 shows that he was awarded the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar for qualifying with the M-14 Rifle.  

14.  Department of the Army, Headquarters, 1st Basic Combat Training Brigade, Fort Jackson, South Carolina Special Orders Number 113, dated 24 May 1968, awarded the applicant the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar for qualifying with the M-14 Rifle.  

15.  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 Company B, 1st Medical Battalion, 1st Infantry Division in the Republic of Vietnam, the unit was cited for award of the Meritorious Unit Commendation, based on Department of the Army General Orders (DAGO) Number 31, dated 1969.
16.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 also shows that at the time of the applicant's assignment to the 1st Medical Battalion of the 1st Infantry Division (less Company C) it was cited for award of the Republic of the Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation, based on DAGO Number 53, dated 1970.

17.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides that the Good Conduct Medal 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.  Although there is no automatic entitlement to the Good Conduct Medal, disqualification must be justified.  

18.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states special provisions for award of the Combat Medical Badge during the Vietnam conflict.  These provisions permitted award of the Combat Medical Badge to Soldiers assigned as a member of a U.S. Army infantry unit of brigade or smaller size including Special Forces Detachments serving with the Republic of Vietnam units engaged in actual ground combat.  The special provisions required that the Soldier must have been personally present and under hostile fire while assigned as specified.

19.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards), in pertinent part, authorizes award of a bronze service star, based on qualifying service, for each campaign listed in Appendix B of this regulation and states that authorized bronze service stars will be worn on the appropriate service medal, including the Vietnam Service Medal.

20.  The applicant's record shows he participated in four campaigns during his service in the Republic of Vietnam: the Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase V, the Vietnam Counteroffensive VI, the Tet 69 Counteroffensive 1969, and the Vietnam Summer-Fall 1969.

21.  The applicant provided a copy of his DD Form 214, dated 4 January 1971 which appears to have been altered to show the following entries: "Army Commendation Medal w/V device, Army Commendation Medal w/First Oak Leaf Cluster, and CMB award."  The DD Form 214 also shows that it was recorded on June 11, 1971, by the Recorder's Office Clark County, State of Ohio, in Volume 43 of Discharges Page 533.



DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that he is entitled to award of the Purple Heart for a wound sustained as a result of hostile action on 25 February 1969.  

2.  There are no general orders that show the applicant was awarded the Purple Heart.  There is no evidence in his service personnel records which shows that he was wounded or injured as a result of hostile action or treated for such wounds.  The applicant's name is not listed on the Vietnam Casualty Roster.  In the absence of evidence that the applicant was wounded or injured as a result of hostile action and treated for those wounds, there is insufficient evidence upon which to base award of the Purple Heart in this case.

3.  In the absence of evidence that the applicant was wounded or injured as a result of hostile action and treated for those wounds, there is insufficient evidence upon which to base any award of the Purple Heart in this case.

4.  Orders show the applicant was awarded the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar for qualifying with the M-14 Rifle.  Therefore, he is entitled to have his records corrected to show this qualification badge.

5.  The applicant's military service records do not contain any orders awarding him the Good Conduct Medal.  However, the applicant is entitled to the first award of the Good Conduct Medal during the period 4 April 1968 through
4 January 1971 based on completion of a period of qualifying service ending with the termination of a period of Federal military service.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his records to show this award.

6.  Orders awarded the applicant’s unit the Meritorious Unit Commendation.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his records to show this award.

7.  Orders awarded the applicant’s unit the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation.  Therefore, he is entitled to have his records corrected to show this foreign unit award.

8.  Records show that the applicant was assigned as a member of a U.S. Army infantry unit of brigade or smaller size during the period 17 September through 

16 February 1969.  However, records also show that he was not personally present and under hostile fire until 25 February 1969, resulting in award of the Army Commendation Medal with “V” Device, while he was assigned to an artillery unit.  Therefore, he does not meet the criterion for award of the Combat Medical Badge. 

9.  Records show that the applicant was awarded the Vietnam Service Medal with two bronze service stars.  Evidence shows that he participated in four campaigns during his service in the Republic of Vietnam.  Therefore, he is eligible for award of two additional bronze service stars to be affixed to his already-awarded Vietnam Service Medal. 

10.  The applicant provided what appears to be an altered DD Form 214, dated
4 January 1971.  The applicant's military record officially shows he is entitled to the Army Commendation Medal with 1 Oak Leaf Cluster and with “V” Device, which has been officially added to his DD Form 214.  He does not meet the criterion for award of the Combat Medical Badge; therefore, his official DD Form 214 correctly does not show this award.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

_LDS____  _RSV___  _SWF___  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 to show award of the Good Conduct Medal for honorable service during the period 4 April 1968 through 4 January 1971; the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar for qualifying with the M-14 Rifle, the Meritorious Unit Commendation, the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation, and the Vietnam Service Medal with 4 bronze service stars.

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.




_____Linda D. Simmons___
          CHAIRPERSON



INDEX

CASE ID
AR20070006186
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
YYYYMMDD
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE
YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR . . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.