IN THE CASE OF:	  

	BOARD DATE:	  9 September 2008

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080008724 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests correction of his Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge (DD Form 214) to show award of the Purple Heart and the Bronze Star Medal.

2.  The applicant states that these awards are not recorded on his DD Form 214.

3.  The applicant provides copies of his DD Form 214 and certificates showing award of the Purple Heart and Bronze Star Medal.

COUNSEL'S REQUEST, STATEMENT AND EVIDENCE:

1.  Counsel requests essentially the same corrections as the applicant has requested above.

2.  Counsel states that the issues raised by the applicant are amply supported by the evidence. 

3.  Counsel provides no additional documentation.

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.  On 5 September 1968, the applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States for 2 years.  He completed his initial training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman).  

3.  On 5 February 1969, the applicant was assigned for duty as a rifleman with the 4th Battalion, 39th Infantry Regiment, in the Republic of Vietnam. 

4.  Item 40 (Wounds) of the applicant’s Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows that on 25 March 1969, the applicant received a fragment wound to his chest.  

5.  General Orders Number 4480, 9th Infantry Division, dated 14 April 1969, awarded the applicant the Army Commendation Medal with “V” Device for heroism on 19 March 1969.

6.  General Orders Number 4540, 9th Infantry Division, dated 15 April 1969, awarded the applicant the Army Commendation Medal (First Oak Leaf Cluster) for the period from 1 February to 1 April 1969.

7.  On 20 April 1969, the applicant was medically evacuated to Ireland Army Hospital, Fort Knox, Kentucky.

8.  On 5 June 1970, the applicant was released from active duty and transferred to the United States Army Reserve Control Group (Annual Training).  He had attained the rank of specialist four, pay grade E-4, and had completed 1 year, 
9 months, and 1 day of creditable active duty service. 

9.  Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant's DD Form 214, lists his awards as the National Defense Service Medal, Army Commendation Medal with First Oak Leaf Cluster, Vietnam Service Medal, Vietnam Campaign Medal, Combat Infantryman Badge, and the Sharpshooter [Marksmanship Qualification] Badge with Rifle Bar.  It does not show award of the Purple Heart or Bronze Star Medal. 
10.  The Awards and Decorations Computer Assisted Retrieval System (ADCARS) does not show that he was awarded a Bronze Star Medal. 

11.  The Vietnam Casualty Roster shows that the applicant was wounded as a result of hostile action on 25 March 1969.

12.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 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.

13.  Review of the applicant's records indicates entitlement to additional awards and decorations that are not shown on his DD Form 214.

14. Item 38 (Record of Assignments) of the applicant's Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows that his conduct and efficiency were excellent.  The applicant’s records do not contain any evidence of disciplinary action.  There is no evidence to show that the commander took any action to deny him the Army Good Conduct Medal. 

15.  Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time, provided that the Army Good Conduct Medal was awarded to individuals who had completed a qualified 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.  The enlisted person must have had all “excellent” conduct and efficiency ratings and no convictions by a court-martial.  Ratings of "Unknown" for 
portions of the period under consideration are not disqualifying.  Service and efficiency ratings based upon academic proficiency of at least "Good" rendered subsequent to 22 November 1955 are not disqualifying.  

16.  Appendix B of Army Regulation 600-8-22 shows that based on the applicant's dates of service in the Republic of Vietnam, he participated in the following two campaign periods: the Vietnam Counteroffensive, Phase VI; and the Tet 69 Counteroffensive.  This same regulation states that a bronze service star will be awarded for wear on the Vietnam Service Medal for participation in each campaign.  

17.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) lists the unit awards received by units serving in the Republic of Vietnam.  This publication shows that the 4th Battalion, 39th Infantry Regiment, during the time of the applicant's assignment, was cited in Department of the Army General Orders Number 59, dated 1969, for award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation and the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  There are no general orders that show the applicant was awarded the Bronze Star Medal.  The certificate provided by the applicant is not sufficient evidence by itself upon which to base a correction of his records.  Should he have, or be able to obtain, a copy of the orders awarding him the Bronze Star Medal, or be able to provide other evidence to corroborate this award, he may submit another application for consideration.

2.  There are no general orders that show the applicant was awarded the Purple Heart.  However, the applicant's records show that he was wounded in action and his name is listed on the Vietnam Casualty Roster.  This evidence corroborates the certificate provided by the applicant.  Therefore, his records should be corrected to show that he was awarded the Purple Heart.

3.  The applicant’s records clearly show that he distinguished himself in the performance of his military service.  Therefore, it is presumed that his not receiving an Army Good Conduct Medal for his service was an oversight.  Accordingly, he should be awarded this medal.

4.  General orders show that the applicant was awarded the Army Commendation Medal with “V” Device for his heroic action on 19 March 1969.  Therefore, his records should be corrected to show this award.

5.  Records show that the applicant participated in two campaign periods during his service in the Republic of Vietnam.  Therefore, he is eligible for award of two bronze service stars to be affixed to his Vietnam Service Medal.

6.  The applicant's unit was cited in general orders for award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, and the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal, First Class Unit Citation.  Therefore, his records should be corrected to show these foreign unit awards. 






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.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by:

	a.  awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period from 
5 September 1968 to 5 June 1970; and

	b.  showing, that in addition to the awards already shown on his DD Form 214, that his awards include the Purple Heart, Army Good Conduct Medal, a “V” Device to be affixed to his already awarded Army Commendation Medal with Oak Leaf Cluster, two bronze service stars to be affixed to his already awarded Vietnam Service Medal, Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, and the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal, First Class Unit Citation.

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 Bronze Star Medal.  




__________ _  X  _______   ___
       CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20070016793



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080008724



5


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1