MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:          16 JANUARY 2003                    
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2002071082

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Ms. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		Member	
	Ms. Marla J. N. Troup		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

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

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  Reconsideration of his earlier appeal to correct his military records by upgrading his Bad Conduct Discharge to a General Discharge. 

APPLICANT STATES:  That he recently received notification that his records had been corrected to show that he had in fact been awarded the Combat Infantryman Badge as a result of his service in Vietnam and that this award, along with several other decorations (Air Medal, Presidential Unit Citation, and two foreign unit awards) further supported his original contention that his protracted period of combat service during the Vietnam War contributed to his combat fatigue, which he maintains was the cause of the misconduct which resulted in his court-martial.  He states that the awards confirm that he "was a Soldier of Honor and [he] did fight for [his] country with Honor!"  He states that the treatment he received was "cruel and unjust and it has only compounded [his] condition."  He states that for "thirty years [he has] been haunted by [his] combat experience and the fact that [his] country turned its back on [him] and regarded and treated [him] like a savage has truly and definitely compounded it all."  In support of his request he submits copies of his corrected separation document and several lengthy self-authored statements that recount his life and service in Vietnam.  The applicant also submits a copy of a Department of Veterans Affairs letter noting that the applicant has been receiving treatment for "Post Traumatic Stress Disorder" since 1992 and that he is receiving "Disability Social Security" for this condition.  

NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION:  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum prepared to reflect the Board's previous consideration of the case (AR2001060314) on 
11 September 2001.

The applicant’s recent award of the Combat Infantryman Badge, as well as documentation of his award of the Air Medal and treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder constitutes new evidence that requires Board consideration.

The applicant's military personnel file was not available to the Board.  Information contained herein was reconstructed from information contained in his original application and documents submitted by the applicant with his current request.

On 7 June 2002 the applicant's records were administratively corrected to show that he had been awarded an Air Medal for "meritorious achievement while participating in aerial flight" in July 1972.  The orders confirming the award were published on 31 July 1972.  In July 1972 the applicant was assigned to Company B of the 229th Aviation Battalion.  He had been assigned to that organization 

since 26 June 1972.  That same organization was awarded a Presidential Unit citation "for extraordinary heroism" during the period 15 April to 7 July 1972.  The Presidential Unit Citation was also added to the applicant's records as part of the 7 June 2002 administrative action.  According to information contained in the applicant's original Board action, he was reassigned from the 229th Aviation Battalion on 5 August 1972, less than 40 days after his initial assignment.

Additionally, as part of the 7 June 2002 administrative action, officials at the Army Review Boards Agency Support Division in St. Louis awarded the applicant a Combat Infantryman Badge, retroactive to 1 June 1972, and added the badge to his separation document.  On 1 June 1972 the applicant would have been assigned to a cavalry unit.  However, the cavalry unit was never awarded any unit decorations during the period the applicant was assigned to that organization.

Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part, that the Combat Infantryman Badge is awarded to infantry officers and to enlisted and warrant officer personnel who have an infantry specialty.  They must have served in active ground combat while assigned or attached to an infantry unit of brigade, regimental or smaller size.  

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  While the record now shows that the applicant was awarded the Combat Infantryman Badge, the Board notes that the badge was awarded administratively nearly 30 years after the fact.  Although the evidence of record does show that the applicant held an infantry specialty and was assigned to an infantry unit in June 1972, there is no evidence which conclusively shows that he was engaged in protracted combat prior to being assigned to the 229th Aviation Battalion on 26 June 1972.  His award of the Air Medal and Presidential Unit Citation while briefly assigned to the 229th Aviation Battalion is more of an indication of combat involvement and that involvement was limited to less than 40 days.

2.  However, notwithstanding the decorations, the Board concludes that there is no evidence which connects his combat involvement to the actions which resulted in his conviction by a special court-martial.  While there is evidence of meritorious service on some occasions during the applicant's military service, the Board again notes that the applicant had several disciplinary problems prior to 

being assigned to Vietnam, which were similar in nature to those resulting in his court-martial action.  Such evidence supports a conclusion that the applicant's location of assignment or particular duties were not at the root of his disciplinary actions and misconduct, and in fact supports a conclusion that the applicant was capable of meritorious service.  The fact that he is now being treated for posttraumatic stress disorder is also not evidence that his misconduct resulted from exposure to a combat environment.

3.  The applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of sleeping on guard duty, threatening to kill his commanding officer, being disrespectful towards an officer, and failing to go to his appointed place of duty; all extremely serious offenses in any location, but particularly inexcusable in a combat theater.  His conviction by a special court-martial, and ensuing punishment, were warranted.  The applicant has not shown that his exposure or involvement in combat, or his racial background, contributed in anyway to his misconduct.

4.  The overall merits of the case, including the latest submissions and arguments are insufficient as a basis for the Board to reverse its previous decision.

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__RVO__  __AAO __  __MJNT_  DENY APPLICATION

	Carl W. S. Chun
    Director, Army Board for Correction 
	of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002071082	
SUFFIX		
RECON	20030116	
DATE BOARDED	20030116	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	 	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.