RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        13 December 2007
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070009862


      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             |
|     |Mr. Joseph A. Adriance            |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Jeffrey C. Redmann            |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. John G. Heck                  |     |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, that his record be corrected to add
two awards of the Purple Heart, two awards of the Bronze Star Medal (BSM),
the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB), and the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, his CIB was not included on his
separation document (DD Form 214), and he did not receive PHs for wounds he
suffered in April and September of 1967.  He further states that
recommendations for the BSM were not submitted for actions in June and
September 1967, and he did not receive the AGCM.

3.  The applicant provides the following documents in support of his
application:  Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Letter, dated 23 June
1994; Field Medical Card (DD Form 1380), dated 18 April 1967; Chronological
Record of Medical Care (SF 600), dated 18 April 1967; Doctor's Orders,
dated 18 April 1967; and Health Treatment Record for 26 September through
30 October 1967.

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 requests two awards of the BSM.  However, there are no
orders or other evidence on file in his Official Military Personnel File
(OMPF) that confirms he is entitled to these awards.  In the absence of
authority for these awards, he may request the BSM under the provisions of
Section 1130 of
Title 10 of the United States Code (10 USC 1130).  The applicant has been
notified by separate correspondence of the procedures for applying for this
award under 10 USC 1130.  As a result, his request for award of the BSM
will not be discussed further in this Record of Proceedings.


3.  The applicant's record shows that he was inducted into the Army and
entered active duty on 21 June 1966.  He was trained in and awarded
military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman), and
sergeant (SGT) is the highest rank he attained while serving on active
duty.

4.  The applicant's Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows that
he served in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) from 25 March 1967 through 24
March 1968.  Item 38 (Record of Assignments) shows that during his RVN
tour, he was assigned to Company C, 3rd Battalion, 22nd Infantry Regiment
from 1 through
13 September 1967 and to Headquarters and Headquarters Company of the same
organization from 13 September 1967 through 24 March 1968.

5.  Item 38 of the applicant's DA Form 20 also shows that he received
"Excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings at each of his active duty
assignments.  Item 40 (Wounds) is blank.  Item 41 (Awards and Decorations)
shows the applicant was awarded the CIB by Headquarters, 3rd Brigade, 25th
Infantry Division Special Orders Number 246.  The PH’s are not included in
the list of awards contained in Item 41.

6.  The applicant's Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) is void of any
orders or documents that indicate the applicant was ever recommended for or
awarded the PH by proper authority while serving on active duty.  The MPRJ
is void of any derogatory information or a unit commander disqualification
that would have precluded the applicant from receiving the AGCM.  It is
also void of any medical treatment records that indicate the applicant was
ever treated for a combat-related wound or injury while serving on active
duty.

7.  On 29 March 1968, the applicant was honorably released from active duty
after completing a total of 1 year, 9 months, and 9 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 during his active duty tenure:
National Defense Service Medal (NDSM); Vietnam Service Medal (VSM); RVN
Campaign Medal; Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle
Bar; and 1 Overseas Service Bar.

8.  The applicant provides a VA Letter, dated 23 June 1994, which indicated
he was granted a service-connected disability rating of 50 percent for a
Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).  It also shows he was denied service
connection for a back condition and left ankle condition.

9.  The applicant also provides a DD Form 1380 that shows he was treated
for a right leg injury on 18 April 1967; however, this document does not
indicate the circumstances under which the injury was sustained.  He also
provides an
SF 600 that shows he was treated for an injury sustained to his right thigh
in a mine explosion on 18 September 1967.

10.  In addition, the applicant provides a medical treatment form that
shows he was treated for Pyoderma (Bacterial Skin Infection) to both legs
on 26 September 1967, and for this and various other medical conditions
between 10 and
30 October 1967.

11.  During the processing of this case, a member of the Board staff
reviewed the Awards and Decorations Computer Assisted Retrieval System
(ADCARS), which is maintained by the Military Awards Branch of the United
States Army Human Resources Command (HRC) and contains General Orders (GOs)
issued between 1965 and 1973, for the Vietnam era.  There were no PH orders
pertaining to the applicant on file in this system.

12.  During the review of this case, a member of the Board staff reviewed
the Department of the Army (DA) Vietnam Casualty Roster, which contained an
entry pertaining to the applicant that confirms he was wounded in action in
the RVN on 19 September 1967.  There is no other entry indicating he was
wounded in action a second time while serving in the RVN.

13.  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 the wound for
which the award is being made was received as a result of enemy action,
that the wound required treatment by military medical personnel, and a
record of this treatment must have been made a matter of official record.
Paragraph 2-8g contains a list of examples of enemy related wounds the
clearly justify award of the PH.  This list includes injuries caused by
enemy placed mine or trap.

14.  Paragraph 2-13 of the awards regulation contains guidance on the
Vietnam Service Medal and states, in pertinent part, that a bronze service
star is authorized with this award for each campaign a member is credited
with participating in while serving in the RVN.

15.  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.

16.  Paragraph 8-6 of the awards regulation provides the policy and
procedure for award of the CIB.  It states, in pertinent part, that there
are basically three requirements for award of the CIB.  The Soldier must be
an infantryman satisfactorily performing infantry duties, he must be
assigned to an infantry unit during such time as the unit is engaged in
active ground combat, and he must actively participate in such ground
combat.  Specific requirements state, in effect, that an Army enlisted
Soldier must have an infantry specialty, satisfactorily performed duty
while assigned or attached as a member of an infantry unit of brigade,
regimental, or smaller size during any period such unit was engaged in
active ground combat.  A recipient must be personally present and under
hostile fire while serving in an assigned infantry primary duty, in a unit
actively engaged in ground combat with the enemy.

17.  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, the applicant’s unit (3rd Battalion, 22nd Infantry
Regiment) received the RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation and RVN
Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation.  It also shows that
during his assignment tenure, participation credit was granted for the
Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase II, Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase III, and
Tet Counteroffensive campaigns.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's claim of entitlement to two awards of the PH was
carefully considered and found to have partial merit.  The evidence of
record includes an entry on the DA Vietnam Casualty Roster pertaining to
the applicant that confirms he was wounded in action in the RVN on 19
September 1967, and a medical treatment form confirms the applicant was
treated for a wound to his right leg that he received as a result of a mine
explosion around this same timeframe.  As a result, it would be appropriate
to award the applicant the PH for being wounded in action in the RVN on 19
September 1967, and to add this award to his record and separation document
at this time.




2.  The evidence of record contains no evidence and the applicant has
failed to provide independent evidence that shows he was wounded in action
a second time while serving in the RVN.  Therefore, there is an
insufficient evidentiary basis to support award of a second PH.

3.  The applicant's claim of entitlement to the CIB was also carefully
considered and found to have merit.  The applicant's DA Form 20 contains an
entry in Item 41 that indicates that the applicant was awarded the CIB by
3rd Brigade, 25th Infantry Division Special Orders Number 246, and the
evidence of record confirms the applicant held and served in an infantry
MOS in a qualifying infantry unit while serving in the RVN, and that he was
wounded in action while serving in this status.  Therefore, it would be
appropriate to add the CIB to the list of awards contained on his
separation document at this time.

4.  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 unit commander disqualification
that would have precluded him from receiving the AGCM.  Therefore, it would
be appropriate to award the applicant the first award of the AGCM, for his
qualifying period of honorable active duty service from 21 June 1966
through
29 March 1968.

5.  The record also shows that based on his RVN service and campaign
participation, the applicant is also entitled to the RVN Gallantry Cross
with Palm Unit Citation, RVN Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit
Citation, and 3 bronze service stars for wear on his already-awarded VSM.
Therefore, it would also be appropriate to add these awards to his record
and separation document at this time.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

__JCR __  __JGH __  __QAS__  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 by:

      a.  awarding him the Purple Heart, for being wounded in action in the
Republic of Vietnam on 19 September 1967, and the Army Good Conduct Medal
for his qualifying honorable active duty service from 21 June 1966 through
29 March 1968;

      b.  amending Item 24 of his DD Form 214 by deleting the current list
of awards and replacing it with the entry "National Defense Service Medal,
Purple Heart, Army Good Conduct Medal, Vietnam Service Medal with 3 bronze
service stars, Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960),
Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, Republic of
Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation, Combat
Infantryman Badge, Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle
Bar, and 2 Overseas Service Bars"; and

      c.  providing him a correction to his separation document that
includes these changes.

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
a second award of the Purple Heart.




                                  _____Jeffrey C. Redmann____
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20070009862                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2007/12/                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1968/03/29                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |OS Rtn                                  |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT PARTIAL                           |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.  46   |107.0000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]