RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  6 March 2008
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070016308 


	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

Mrs. Nancy L. Amos

Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:


Mr. James B. Gunlicks

Chairperson

Mr. Donald W. Steenfott

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 that he be awarded the Purple Heart.

2.  The applicant states that he was wounded by shrapnel from a mortar attack in mid-April 1969 but never received a Purple Heart.  He thinks most of the records were destroyed in an attack shortly afterwards.

3.  The applicant provides a letter, dated 5 October 2007, requesting all military awards with a copy of the related envelope; and his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge).

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 8 January 1968.  He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty 91A (Medical Aidman).

3.  The applicant arrived in Vietnam and was assigned to the 11th Medical Detachment, U. S. Military Assistance Command, Vietnam, on 22 June 1968.  He departed Vietnam on 19 June 1969 after being credited with participating in five campaigns.

4.  On 17 December 1970, the applicant completed a separation physical examination.  Item 39 (Identifying Body Marks, Scars, Tattoos) of his Standard Form 88 (Report of Medical Examination) contains one entry, “1 (inch) scar low back knife wound.”  He checked “yes” in item 34 (Have You Consulted or Been Treated by Clinics, Physicians, Healers, or other Practitioners within the Past      5 Years) of his Standard Form 89 (Report of Medical History), but no explanation was given in the provided space.  Item 39 (Physician’s Summary and Elaboration of All Pertinent Data) contains the entries, “UCHDINS/worn glasses 3 yrs/Allergic to Typhoid/Gonorrhea RVN – 1969/Back Trouble No Prob/No Comp.”

5.  Item 40 (Wounds) of the applicant’s DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) does not show he was wounded.  His name is not listed on the Vietnam Casualty Roster.

6.  The applicant was honorably released from active duty, in pay grade E-5, on  7 January 1971 after completing 3 years of creditable active service with no lost time.  His DD Form 214 shows he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, the Army Commendation Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal, the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with device (1960), and two overseas service bars.

7.  The applicant’s DA Form 20 shows his conduct and efficiency were rated as “excellent” throughout his service, and his records contain no derogatory information.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides for award of the Purple Heart 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 by a medical officer, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 authorizes award of a bronze service star, based on qualifying service, for each campaign listed in Appendix B of this regulation.  Authorized bronze service stars will be worn on the appropriate campaign or service medal, including the Vietnam Service Medal.  One silver service star is worn in lieu of five bronze service stars.

10.  Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time, provided 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  

11.  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.  There is no evidence of record and the applicant provided none to show he was wounded in action.  His name is not listed on the Vietnam Casualty Roster.  His DA Form 20 does not show that he was wounded.  His separation physical examination does not show that he was wounded and treated for wounds.  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to show he met the eligibility criteria for  award of the Purple Heart.

2.  It appears the applicant met the eligibility criteria for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.  He completed 3 years of creditable active service with no lost time and no derogatory information in his records.  His conduct and efficiency were rated as “excellent” throughout his service.  He should be awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal.

3.  The applicant was credited with participating in five campaigns while in Vietnam and is therefore eligible to wear the Vietnam Service Medal with one silver service star.  His DD Form 214 should be amended to reflect this fact.

4.  All units in Vietnam were later awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation.  This unit award should be added to the applicant’s DD Form 214.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

__jbg___  __dws___  __rsv___  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 first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 8 January 1968 through 7 January 1971; and

     b.  amending his DD Form 214 to add the Army Good Conduct Medal and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation and to show he is eligible to wear one silver service star on his already-awarded Vietnam Service Medal.

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 awarding him the Purple Heart. 




__James B. Gunlicks__
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20070016308
SUFFIX

RECON

DATE BOARDED
YYYYMMDD
TYPE OF DISCHARGE

DATE OF DISCHARGE

DISCHARGE AUTHORITY

DISCHARGE REASON

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

ISSUES         1.
107.0015
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.