IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	    3 February 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100014680 


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 reconsideration of his previous application for correction of his record to show he was awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM), to add missing awards, and to show he qualified with the M1 carbine and 3.5-inch rocket launcher.

2.  He also submits a new request for correction of his records to:

	a.  show he was wounded in item 27 (Wounds Received as a Result of Action with Enemy Forces) of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge),

	b.  show he was awarded the Purple Heart,

	c.  show his blood type is "O" on his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) and correct erasures and changes on the form,

	d.  remove an EPEECO Form 10 (Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) Evaluation Data Report),

	e.  replace incorrect and illegible entries on his DA Form 24 (Service Record),

	f.  delete entries on his DA Form 348 (Driver Qualification Record) showing he was qualified for operating tanks,

	g.  show he completed training in search and rescue,

	h.  show he was awarded the Parachutist Badge, and

	i.  show he was a prisoner of war (POW).

3.  The applicant states, in effect:

* he should have medals for his service in Vietnam
* when he served in Vietnam, special operations personnel carried the M1 carbine, not the M1 rifle, and he qualified with the M1 carbine in 1963
* his DA Form 24 and DA Form 20 show errors, omissions, and erasures
* his records do not show he was awarded the Parachutist Badge
* he was wounded multiple times and should have received the Purple Heart
* he should be listed as a POW due to his capture in Vietnam
* an MOS Evaluation Data Report was not done on him
* he was not qualified for operating tanks

4.  The applicant provides copies of documents from his official military personnel file, photographs he states were taken during his service in Vietnam, and medical records from the Cleveland Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center (VAMC).

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20090004720 on 27 August 2009.

2.  The applicant submitted a new argument which was not previously considered by the ABCMR; therefore, it is considered new evidence and as such warrants consideration by the Board.

3.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 27 June 1962 and was honorably released from active duty on 12 June 1965.  He completed 2 years, 11 months, and 16 days of active military service.

4.  AGCM.

	a.  Section 2 (Chronological Record of Military Service) of his DA Form 24 shows his last conduct rating was "good."  The record is void of documentation showing the basis for this rating.

	b.  Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Military Awards), in effect at the time, stated the AGCM was awarded for each 3 years of continuous enlisted active Federal military service completed on or after 27 August 1940; for the first award only, 1 year served entirely during the period 7 December 1941 to 2 March 1946; 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.  The enlisted person must have had all "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings.  There must have been no convictions by a court-martial.  However, there was no right or entitlement to the medal until the immediate commander made a positive recommendation for its award and until the awarding authority announced the award in general orders.

5.  Weapons Qualification.

	a.  Section 9 (Medals, Decorations, and Citations) of his DA Form 24 shows he qualified as a Marksman with the M1 rifle and M14 rifle.

	b.  The record is void of documentation showing he qualified with the M1 carbine or the 3.5-inch rocket launcher.

	c.  Several of the photographs provided by the applicant show him holding a short-barreled weapon that appears to be a carbine.

6.  Wounds and Purple Heart.

	a.  His DD Form 214 shows "none" in item 27.

	b.  The record is void of documentation showing he was wounded in action during his service in Vietnam.

	c.  His name does not appear on the Vietnam casualty roster.

	d.  The VAMC medical record he provides shows the following entries:

* toenails left first nail deformed, right first nail deformed
* linear scar right hand dorsally, three more scars right arm, right upper quadrant and small scar right lower quadrant, left hand first metacarpal dorsally with small scar
* "little flicks" described elsewhere
* ? scar versus fold nuchal aspect
* right ventral wrist scarred

	e.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states the Purple Heart is awarded for a wound sustained in action against an 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 medical personnel, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.

	f.  The version of Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), in effect at the time, stated to enter chronologically each wound received as a result of enemy action during the period covered by the DD Form 214 being prepared and show both date and place of action if recorded on records available at the time of separation.  If records were not available, the phrase "no records available" was to be entered.

7.  POW.

	a.  The record is void of documentation showing he was a POW.

	b.  His name does not appear on the POW roster maintained by the National Archives and Records Administration.

8.  Blood Type.

	a.  His DA Form 20 shows the entry "Blood Type:  A" in item 34 (Remarks).

	b.  His DD Form 214 shows the entry "Blood Group O" in item 32 (Remarks).

9.  MOS Evaluation Data Report.

	a.  An EPEECO Form 10 shows he was evaluated in MOS 631.1 (Wheel Vehicle Mechanic) during the August 1964 evaluation period.

	b.  Army Regulation 611-205 (Enlisted Evaluation System), in effect at the time, provided that MOS evaluation testing would be conducted annually or bi-annually.  The most recent report of evaluation was kept in a Soldier's record.

10.  Driver Qualification.

	a.  Item 33 (Record of Assignments) of his DA Form 20 shows he was assigned to principal duty as a wheel vehicle and track vehicle mechanic during his Army service.  He was assigned to principal duty as a track vehicle mechanic from on or about 27 January 1964 to on or about 6 July 1964.

	b.  A DA Form 348 shows he was tested on 18 February 1964 in accordance with Army Regulation 600-55 (Motor Vehicle Driver – Selection, Testing, and Licensing) and U.S. Army Europe Circular 58-60 and found qualified to drive several tracked vehicles, including the M48A2 tank and the M88 tank recovery vehicle.  The form bears his signature next to the date 18 February 1964.

11.  The record is void of documentation showing he completed search and rescue training.

12.  Awards and Decorations.

	a.  Parachutist Badge.

		(1)  The record is void of documentation showing he received airborne training or that he was awarded the Parachutist Badge.

		(2)  Army Regulation 600-8-22 states award of the basic Parachutist Badge requires that an individual must have satisfactorily completed the prescribed proficiency tests while assigned or attached to an airborne unit or the Airborne Department of the Infantry School or have participated in at least one combat parachute jump.  Authority to wear the badge must be announced in published orders.

	b.  Vietnam Awards.

		(1)  Army Regulation 600-8-22 states the AFEM is awarded for qualifying service after 1 July 1958 in military operations within a specific geographic area during a specified time period.  It states individuals qualified for the AFEM for service in Vietnam from 1 July 1958 and 3 July 1965 (inclusive) will remain qualified for that medal.  Upon request, the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM) may be awarded in lieu of the AFEM, but the regulation requires removal of the AFEM from the individual's records.  No person will be entitled to both awards for Vietnam service.

		(2)  Army Regulation 600-8-22 states a bronze service star is worn on the appropriate service ribbon, to include the VSM, for each credited campaign.  The applicant's service in Vietnam coincides with the Vietnam Advisory Campaign (15 March 1962-7 March 1965).

		(3)  Army Regulation 600-8-22 states the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960) was awarded by the Government of Vietnam to all members of the Armed Forces of the United States for qualifying service in Vietnam during the period 1 March 1961 through 28 March 1973.  Qualifying service included assignment in Vietnam for 6 months or more.  Qualifying service outside the geographical limits of the Republic of Vietnam required the individual to provide direct combat support to the Republic of Vietnam and Armed Forces.  

		(4)  Department of the Army General Orders Number 8, dated 1974, announced award of the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) 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.

	c.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 states the National Defense Service Medal (NDSM) is awarded for honorable active service for any period between 1 January 1961 and 14 August 1974.

13.  Entries on the DA Form 24 and DA Form 20.

	a.  Chapter 9 of the version of Army Regulation 600-200 (Enlisted Personnel Management System) in effect at the time provided guidance for making entries on the DA Form 20 and superseded Army Regulation 640-201 (Personnel Records – Service Record) which provided guidance for making entries on the DA Form 24.

	b.  These regulations authorized typewritten and handwritten entries.  Although typewritten entries were preferred, handwritten entries in ink were acceptable.  Local commanders could also authorize entries in pencil for certain types of temporary information, such as weapons qualification.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The available evidence does not support the applicant's request for reconsideration of his previous application for correction of his record to show he was awarded the AGCM or to show he qualified with the M1 carbine and 3.5-inch rocket launcher.

2.  The available evidence also does not support his request for correction of his record to:

* show he was wounded and received the Purple Heart
* remove an EPEECO Form 10
* delete entries on his DA Form 348 showing he was qualified for operating tanks
* show he completed training in search and rescue
* show he was awarded the Parachutist Badge
* show he was a POW
* amend entries on his DA Form 20 and DA Form 24, including the entry for his blood type

3.  The available evidence supports correcting his record to show awards he earned for his service in Vietnam and the NDSM.

4.  The record shows the applicant did not receive all "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings.  The available evidence does not show the "good" conduct rating he received was an error.  Therefore, he is not entitled to award of the AGCM.

5.  The record is void of documentation showing he qualified with the M1 carbine or the 3.5-inch rocket launcher.  Although he has provided photographs showing him using a carbine, the photographs do not establish that he qualified with the weapon or what level of qualification he may have received.  Therefore, he is not entitled to correction of his record to show he qualified with these weapons.

6.  The record is void of documentation showing the applicant was wounded in action during his service in Vietnam.  Although a VAMC examination found scars, the available documentation is insufficient to verify that he was wounded as the result of hostile action or that he received a wound that required treatment by medical personnel.  Therefore, he is not entitled to correction of his record to show he was wounded or awarded the Purple Heart.

7.  When he served, Army regulations required regular MOS evaluation testing and required placing documentation of the most recent test in the Soldier's file.  The EPEECO Form 10 in his record shows he was tested in his MOS within the year prior to his discharge.  In the absence of evidence showing otherwise, it must be presumed this document was properly executed and filed.  Therefore, he is not entitled to removal of the EPEECO Form 10 from his record.

8.  The record shows the applicant passed an examination that qualified him to drive tracked vehicles, including tanks.  Although he may never have driven a tank, it appears operating the vehicle was not required for certification.  Therefore, he is not entitled to correction of his DA Form 348 to remove his qualification to drive the M48A2 and M88.

9.  The record is void of documentation showing he completed search and rescue training.  Therefore, he is not entitled to correction of his record to show this training.

10.  The record is void of documentation showing he met the requirements for award of the Parachutist Badge.  Therefore, he is not entitled to correction of his record to show this award.

11.  The record is void of documentation showing he was held captive during his service in Vietnam.  Therefore, he is not entitled to correction of his record to show he was a POW.

12.  At the time of his military service, an individual's weapons qualifications, MOS training, campaign participation, service in overseas commands, and other related information were entered on a DA Form 24 and, later, a DA Form 20.  After a Soldier is discharged, these forms are not normally accessible by individuals other than the Soldier and making corrections to these forms generally provides no benefit.  In the absence of evidence showing mistakes or omissions on these forms have resulted in inequity or injustice, he is not entitled to corrections to his DA Form 24 or DA Form 20.  Of note is the fact that he states his blood type is "O," which is shown on his DD Form 214.

13.  He was awarded the AFEM for his service in Vietnam; however, he has stated, in effect, that he wants his record to show Vietnam-specific decorations.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his record to delete the AFEM and add the VSM with one bronze service star.

14.  His service in Vietnam qualifies for award of the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960).  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his record to show this award.

15.  The applicant served in a unit that received the RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his record to show this award.

16.  He served during a period of eligibility for the NDSM.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his record to show this award.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

__X_____  __X____  __X_____  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  With regard to the portion of the application pertaining to reconsideration, the evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20090004720, dated 27 August 2009.

2.  The Board determined the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief with regard to the portion of the application not previously considered.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by:

	a.  deleting the AFEM from his DD Form 214 and

	b.  adding the VSM with one bronze service star, NDSM, Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960), and RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation to item 24 of his DD Form 214.

3.  The Board further determined the evidence presented was insufficient to warrant a portion of the application with regard to the new issues.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to:

* show he was wounded and awarded the Purple Heart
* replace incorrect and illegible entries on his DA Form 24 and DA Form 20 
* remove an EPEECO Form 10
* delete entries on his DA Form 348
* show he completed training in search and rescue 
* show he was awarded the Parachutist Badge
* show he was a POW




      _______ _ 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)                                         AR20100014680



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100014680



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1