IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  19 July 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100030222 


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 DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show award of the Bronze Star Medal.

2.  In addition, he requests correction of his DD Form 214 to show award of the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB), Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM), two Purple Hearts (PH), letters of commendation, Department of the Army Certificate of Appreciation, Republic of Vietnam (RVN) Certificate of Service, and all awards to which he is entitled as new issues.  Further, the applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 to show all of the education and training he completed as well as his service in Germany.

3.  The applicant states his original request was incorrectly stated by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) representative.

4.  The applicant provides:

* DD Form 214
* VA letter of service-connected compensation
* VA rating decision
* BSM orders
* three DA Forms 1594 (Daily Staff Journal or Duty Officer's Log)
* combat unit history extracts
* VA Form 21-0820 (Report of General Information)


* Standard Form 600 (Chronological Record of Medical Care)
* Standard Form 93 (Report of Medical History)
* M-16 rifle proficiency extract
* three letters
* Certificate of Appreciation
* Republic of Vietnam Certificate of Service

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 AR20090012016 on 15 December 2009.

2.  The applicant provides BSM orders as new evidence that will be considered.

3.  The applicant's record shows he was inducted into the Army of the United States on 8 February 1968.  He was honorably discharged for immediate enlistment on 14 February 1968 and enlisted in the Regular Army on 15 February 1968.  He completed basic combat and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 63H (Engineer Powertrain Repairman).  He was honorably discharged on 15 October 1968 for immediate reenlistment on 16 October 1968.  The highest rank/grade he attained while serving on active duty was specialist five/E-5.

4.  His DD Form 214 for the period ending 29 September 1970 shows he served in the RVN from 25 January 1969 through 29 September 1970.  Item 38 (Record of Assignments) of his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows he was assigned to the 223rd Supply and Services Company from 6 February 1969 through 23 July 1969 performing duties in MOS 63H as a mechanic.  It further shows he was assigned to Company D, 75th Support Battalion, 1st Brigade, 5th Infantry Division, in the RVN from 24 July 1969 through 24 September 1970 as a senior heavy vehicle driver.

5.  The applicant's OMPF contains a letter of appreciation from his company commander, dated 12 May 1970.

6.  The applicant provided a copy of DA Form 1594, dated 10 June 1970, that states "Se_____t" [sic] was very seriously injured.  The majority of the others injured were fragment wounds incurred in and around the billet area where rockets hit.

7.  Headquarters, 1st Infantry Brigade, 5th Infantry Division (Mechanized), General Orders Number 1568, dated 28 August 1970, provided by the applicant show he was awarded the BSM for meritorious service from February 1970 to September 1970.

8.  On 29 September 1970, the applicant was honorably released from active duty and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group (Reinforcement) after completing 2 years, 7 months, and 23 days of total active service.  The DD Form 214 he was issued lists awards in item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) as follows:

* National Defense Service Medal
* Vietnam Service Medal (VSM)
* Army Commendation Medal with 1st Oak Leaf Cluster
* two overseas service bars
* Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960)
* Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-14)

9.  The CIB is not included in the list of awards contained in item 41 (Awards and Decorations) of his DA Form 20 and the applicant's official military personnel file (OMPF) is void of orders or any other documents which indicate he was recommended for or awarded the CIB during his active duty tenure.

10.  Item 27 (Military Education) of his DA Form 20 is void of entry.  Item 28 (Specialized Training) of his DA Form 20 lists Army Training Program 21-114, Code of Conduct, and Military Justice, as well as the completion dates of the training.

11.  Item 22c (Foreign and/or Sea Service) of the applicant's DD Form 214 for the period ending 15 October 1968 lists U.S. Army Europe (USAREUR).  Item 31 (Foreign Service) of his DA Form 20 lists service in USAREUR-Germany from 15 September 1968 through 4 December 1968.

12.  Item 38 (Record of Assignments) of his DA Form 20 shows he received "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings during his entire period of service.  A commander's disqualification for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM) is not present in the applicant's record.

13.  The applicant's OMPF is void of orders or documents that indicate he was awarded the PH by proper authority while serving on active duty.  It also contains no medical records showing he was wounded in action or treated for a wound received as a result of enemy action.
14.  During the processing of this case, a member of the Board staff reviewed the Department of the Army Vietnam casualty roster.  The applicant's name is not included on the roster as either "Sa____t" or "Se_____t."

15.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states the CIB is awarded to infantry officers and to enlisted and warrant officer persons who have an infantry MOS.  They must have served in active ground combat while assigned or attached to an infantry unit of brigade, regimental, or smaller size.  Additionally, appendix V of U.S. Army Vietnam Regulation 672-1 (Decorations and Awards) states that during the Vietnam era the CIB was awarded only to enlisted individuals who held and served in MOS 11B, 11C, 11D, 11F, 11G, or 11H.

16.  U.S. Army Vietnam Regulation 672-1 also stated that criteria for award of the CIB identified the man who trained, lived, and fought as an infantryman and that the CIB was the unique award established to recognize the infantryman and only the infantryman for his service.  Further, "the CIB is not an award for being shot at or for undergoing the hazards of day-to-day combat."  This regulation also stated the CIB was authorized for award to infantry officers, to enlisted personnel, and to warrant officers who had an infantry specialty/MOS and required that they must have served in active ground combat while assigned or attached to an infantry unit of brigade, regimental, or smaller size.

17.  Army Regulation 672-5-1 (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.

18.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 states the PH 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 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.  This regulation also states that when contemplating an award of the PH, the key issue commanders must take into consideration is the degree to which the enemy caused the injury.

19.  Army Regulation 600-8-22, paragraph 2-13, contains the regulatory guidance on the VSM and states that a bronze service star is authorized with this award for each RVN campaign a member is credited with participating in.  A silver service star is authorized in lieu of five bronze service stars.  Appendix B shows that during his service in the RVN, participation credit was awarded for the following five campaigns:

* Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase VI (2 November 1968-22 February 1969)
* Vietnam Summer-Fall 1969 (9 June 1969-31 October 1969)
* Vietnam Winter-Spring 1970 (1 November 1969-30 April 1970)
* Sanctuary Counteroffensive (1 May 1970-30 June 1970)
* Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase VII (1 July 1970-30 June 1971)

20.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register), paragraph 6d, states that Department of the Army General Orders Number 8, dated 1974, announced award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation to Headquarters, U.S. Army Vietnam, and its subordinate units for the period 20 July 1965 to 28 March 1973.

21.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), in effect at the time, prescribed the separation documents prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army and established standardized policy for the preparation of the DD Form 214.  It stated for:

	a.  item 24, to enter all decorations, service medals, campaign credits, and badges awarded or authorized;

	b.  item 25, to enter installation training courses (qualification courses), military correspondence courses, and off-duty courses an enlisted member successfully completed during the period covered by the DD Form 214; and

	c.  item 22c, to enter the total active duty performed outside the continental limits of the United States for the period covered by the DD Form 214 and the last overseas theater in which the service was performed (e.g., USAREUR).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  With respect to the CIB, the applicant's service in the RVN is not in question.  However, his records show he held an ordnance MOS.  There is no evidence in his records that shows he held an infantry MOS and that he was personally present with an infantry unit while it was engaged in active ground combat with the enemy.

2.  Regrettably, in the absence of conclusive evidence that the applicant held an infantry MOS and actively participated in ground combat while assigned to an infantry unit, there is insufficient evidence upon which to base award of the CIB in this case.

3.  The available evidence shows the applicant received "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings at all of his active duty assignments and his record is void of any derogatory information or a unit commander's disqualification that would have precluded him from receiving the AGCM.  Therefore, it would be appropriate to award him the AGCM (1st Award) for the period 8 February 1968 through 29 September 1970 and to correct his DD Form 214 to show this award.

4.  General Orders Number 1568 awarded the applicant the BSM for meritorious service which is not shown on his DD Form 214.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his DD Form 214 to show this award.

5.  The applicant's record contains no medical treatment records or other documents that confirm the applicant was wounded as a result of enemy action or treated for a combat-related wound or injury while serving in the RVN.  The applicant provided a copy of DA Form 1594, dated 10 June 1970, which states "Se_____t" [sic] was very seriously injured when rockets hit the area.  However, it cannot be verified that the applicant is that identified Soldier.  The regulatory burden of proof necessary to support award of the PH has not been met; therefore, it would not be appropriate to award the applicant the PH.

6.  The applicant's record contains a company commander's letter of appreciation.  The established standardized policy for the preparation of the DD Form 214 allows for awards and decorations to be entered on the DD Form 214.  Letters or certificates of appreciation are not authorized to be entered on the form.

7.  The applicant's unit was cited for award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation during his period of assignment.  Therefore, his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show this unit award.

8.  The evidence of record also confirms that based on the applicant's service and campaign participation in the RVN, he is entitled to one silver service star for wear with his previously-awarded VSM.  Therefore, his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show the VSM with one silver service star.

9.  The regulation governing preparation of separation documents in effect at the time allowed for entering installation training courses (qualification courses), military correspondence courses, and off-duty courses an enlisted member successfully completed during the period covered by the DD Form 214 in item 25.  The applicant's record does not contain and he did not provide evidence in the form of orders or other official documentation which indicates he successfully completed any qualifying courses.  Therefore, he is not entitled to add any courses to item 25 of his DD Form 214.

10.  Records show the applicant was assigned to USAREUR and this service is annotated on his previously-issued DD Form 214 which honorably discharged him for immediate reenlistment on 15 October 1968.  Therefore, this entry is not authorized on his last DD Form 214.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

___X___  ___X____  ____X___  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief.

2.  As to the request for reconsideration, the Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant amendment of the ABCMR's decision in Docket Number AR20090012016, dated 15 December 2009, by adding the BSM to item 24 of his DD Form 214.

3.  As for the applicant's new issues, the Board determined the evidence presented is 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 AGCM (1st Award) for the period 8 February 1968 through 29 September 1970;

	b.  deleting the VSM from item 24 of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 29 September 1970; and

	c.  adding the following awards to item 24 of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 29 September 1970:

* AGCM (1st Award)
* VSM with one silver service star
* RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation

4.  The Board further determined 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 CIB and two PH's.



      __________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)                                         AR20100030222



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100030222



8


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1