PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:           24 February 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000035829

	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.  

	Mr. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Celia L. Adolphi		Chairperson	
	Mr. James P. Huber		Member	
	Ms. Margaret V. Thompson		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
            records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests that  his records be corrected to show that he was awarded two Bronze Star Medals (BSM) and Army Commendation Medals (ARCOM) with “V” devices instead of the one BSM and ARCOM currently indicated on his records.

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that he should have received credit for two awards each of the medals with “V” devices and he would like his records corrected before he dies. 

4.  The applicant’s military records show that the applicant enlisted in Chicago, Illinois on 12 August 1965 for a period of 3 years.  He completed his basic training at Fort Knox, Kentucky and was transferred to Fort Sill, Oklahoma for advanced individual training (AIT) in field artillery.  He completed his AIT and remained at Fort Sill where he also performed duties as a radio operator and clerk typist.  He was subsequently transferred to Fort Belvoir, Virginia to attend the Engineer OCS.  He failed to complete OCS and remained at Fort Belvoir as a chaplain’s assistant until he was transferred to Vietnam on 27 October 1966.

5.  While in Vietnam he was assigned to D troop, 3d Squadron, 4th Cavalry, 25th Infantry Division.  He was awarded the ARCOM with “V” device for an enemy action on 7 December 1966, the Air Medal (AM) for meritorious achievement while participating in aerial flight during the period 3 January to 7 February 1967, and the BSM with “V” device for heroism on 31 January and 1 February 1967.  He was promoted to the pay grade of E-4 on 2 February 1967. 

6.  The applicant was also wounded during the 1 February 1967 engagement which resulted in a gunshot wound to his back and left arm.  His records reflect that he was hospitalized for his wounds and was evacuated to the Navy hospital in Great Lakes, Illinois.  There is no indication that he was ever awarded the Purple Heart (PH) for those wounds.

7.  He was subsequently transferred to Fort Knox, where he remained until he was approved for an early release from active duty to attend school.  He was honorably released from active duty on 10 June 1968.  He had served 2 years, 9 months, and 29 days of total active service.

8.  The official report of separation (DD Form 214) contained in the applicant’s records show that he was awarded the ARCOM without a “V” device and there is no indication of his awards of the BSM with “V” device or the AM.

9.  The applicant’s records also contain a photocopied DD Form 214 that has been altered to show he was awarded the PH, the BSM, the AM, and the Combat Infantryman Badge.  However, the applicant did not possess an infantry military occupational specialty and therefore was not entitled to an award of the CIB.
10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 establishes the criteria for award of the CIB.  It states, in pertinent part, that to be eligible for the CIB, an individual must be an infantryman with an infantry military occupational specialty (MOS) and must perform duty as an infantryman, as a member of an infantry unit of brigade or smaller size, during any period in which that unit was engaged in ground combat. Battle participation credit alone is not sufficient.

11.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 also provides, in pertinent part, that the Purple Heart is awarded for a wound/injury sustained as a result of hostile action.  Substantiating evidence must be provided to verify that the wound/injury was a result of hostile action, that the wound/injury must have required treatment by a medical officer, and that the medical treatment was made a matter of official record.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Although the applicant has not addressed the issue, there is sufficient evidence to show that the applicant was wounded on 1 February 1967 while serving in Vietnam and that he was treated by medical personnel.

2.  Therefore, it is reasonable to presume that as result of an administrative oversight, he was not awarded the Purple Heart that he was entitled to receive.  Accordingly, it would be in the interest of justice to correct this error at this time.

3.  The applicant’s records also contain orders which clearly show that he was awarded both the BSM and ARCOM with “V” devices as well as the AM.  However, at the time of separation his official DD Form 214 was prepared to reflect only an award of the ARCOM with no indication of a “V” device.

4.  Therefore, it would be in the interest of justice to correct his records at this time to show that in lieu of an ARCOM, he was awarded the ARCOM with “V” device, the BSM with “V” device, and the AM.

5.  The applicant’s contention that he should have been awarded two ARCOM’s and BSM’s with “V” devices have been noted by the Board but are not supported either by the evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of record.

6.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by awarding the individual concerned a PH for wounds received in action against the enemy in Vietnam on 1 February 1967.

2.  That his records be corrected to show that he was awarded the BSM with “V” device, the AM, and the ARCOM with “V” device in lieu of the ARCOM that is currently reflected on his DD Form 214.

3.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

__cla___  __jph__      __mvt___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		_____Celia L. Adolphi_______
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000035829	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/02/24	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  107.0015	61/PH	
2.  110.0000	189/CORR 214	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.