MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           18 July 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002071862

	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. Nancy L. Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor		Chairperson	
	Mr. Stanley Kelley		Member	
	Mr. John P. Infante		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:  That his records be corrected to show he was awarded the Purple Heart and the Combat Infantryman Badge, to show he was promoted to Sergeant First Class, E-7, and to show his prisoner of war status.

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was wounded by shrapnel in the back on a mission for which he and his squad received a Bronze Star Medal.  In regards to his promotion, one Article 15 which should have been taken out of his records after 90 days should not have been held against him.  He provides his Report of Separation from Active Duty, DD Form 214, for the period ending 18 July 1974 as supporting evidence.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 26 May 1961.  He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 121.27 (Combat Engineer).

On 12 November 1964, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for speeding and reckless driving.  (He later contended in his Headquarters, Department of the Army (HQDA) bar to reenlistment appeal that another soldier was driving the vehicle).  On 18 January 1965, he accepted NJP under Article 15, UCMJ uttering a worthless check in the amount of $3.00.  (He later contended in his HQDA bar to reenlistment appeal that his wife failed to balance the checkbook properly.)

The applicant arrived in Vietnam and was assigned to Company C, 307th Engineer Battalion, 3d Brigade, 82d Airborne Division on 14 February 1968       as a 12B40 squad leader.  He was promoted to Staff Sergeant, E-6 on 1 June 1968.  General Orders 346, Headquarters, 3d Brigade, 82d Airborne Division dated 13 December 1968 awarded the applicant and 16 others from his company the Bronze Star Medal for the period 10 April through 10 December 1968.  

The applicant was honorably discharged on 22 August 1969 for the purpose of immediately reenlisting on 23 August 1969.  His DD Form 214 for this period shows he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, the Army Good Conduct Medal 2d award, the Parachute Badge, the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (for earlier service in the Dominican Republic), the Vietnam Service Medal, the Vietnam Campaign Medal, the Army Commendation Medal, the Bronze Star Medal, and three marksman qualification badges.

The applicant departed Vietnam on 31 August 1969 after being credited with six campaigns.  There is no record to show that he was wounded in action.

On 16 September 1973, the applicant accepted NJP under Article 15, UCMJ for being incapacitated for the proper performance of his duties as a result of previous indulgence in intoxicating liquor and for absenting himself from his appointed place of duty.

By letter dated 10 May 1974, the applicant was notified that he had been selected by the 1973 E-7 promotion selection board for an HQDA bar to reenlistment under the Qualitative Management Program.  The letter cited his two incidents of punishment under Article 15 (it appears that the September 1973 Article 15 was not considered), his below average MOS evaluation scores, and his marginal performance as reflected on enlisted efficiency reports (EERs).  Apparently, the promotion selection board considered five EERs.  His EER for the period ending January 1973 showed he received one outstanding, four excellent, and one above average ratings in characteristics, a 4 rating (from a high of 1 to a low of 8) in advancement potential, and a comment of “…does not possess First Sergeant potential…”  His EER for the period ending March 1972 showed he received two outstanding, three excellent, and one above average ratings in characteristics, and a 4 rating in advancement potential.  His EER for the period ending September 1971 showed he received four outstanding and two excellent ratings in characteristics and a 4 rating in advancement potential.  His EER for the period ending March 1971 showed he received four outstanding and two excellent ratings in characteristics and a 2 rating in advancement potential.  His EER for the period ending September 1970 showed he received two above average and four average ratings in characteristics and a 6 rating in advancement potential.

On 25 June 1974, the applicant requested immediate separation, one of the options afforded him as a result of his HQDA bar to reenlistment.

On 18 July 1974, the applicant was honorably discharged.  His DD Form 214 for this period shows he was awarded the Vietnam Service Medal, the Vietnam Campaign Medal, the Army Commendation Medal, the Bronze Star Medal, the Master Parachute Badge, and the Army Good Conduct Medal 4th award.  His Enlisted Qualification Record, DA Form 20, shows he was awarded the Expert Qualification Badge, Rifle M-16 on 7 January 1971.  

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 by a medical officer, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.  It provides for the award of the Combat Infantryman Badge to a soldier who is an infantryman satisfactorily performing infantry duties, who is assigned to an infantry unit during such time as the unit is engaged in active ground combat, and must actively participate in such ground combat.  Campaign or battle credit alone is not sufficient for award of the CIB.  It provides for the wear of one bronze service star on the appropriate service medal for each credited campaign.  One silver service star is worn in lieu of five bronze service stars.

Army Regulation 27-10 prescribes and implements the policies and procedures pertaining to the administration of military justice.  At the time in question, it provided filing guidance for records of nonjudicial punishment.  It stated that, in cases of persons serving on active duty in an enlisted status and having completed more than 3 year of active Federal military service at the time of the offense alleged, the original would be forwarded to the U. S. Army Enlisted Records Center for permanent filing in the efficiency portion of the Official Military Personnel File (OMPF).

Army Regulation 600-200, in effect at the time, prescribed policies pertaining to career management of Army enlisted personnel, to include enlisted promotions and reductions.  A centralized promotion system went into effect for E-7s on       1 June 1970.  Centralized promotion boards (for promotion consideration to grades E-7, E-8 and E-9) will select the best-qualified soldier in each MOS for promotion.  They will recommend a specified number of soldiers by MOS from zones of consideration who are the best qualified to meet the needs of the Army. The total number selected in each MOS is the projected number the Army needs to maintain its authorized-by-grade strength at any given time.  

Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 shows that the 307th Engineer Battalion was awarded the Meritorious Unit Commendation for the period 14 February 1969 – 23 August 1969, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation for the period 6 October 1968 – 11 November 1969, and the Republic   of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal, First Class Unit Citation for the period     12 March – 4 October 1968.

The U. S. Total Army Personnel Command, Casualty Branch verified that the applicant is on neither the released from captivity roster or the escaped from captivity roster.

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.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

2.  The Board appreciates the applicant’s service as a combat engineer in Vietnam; however, he was not an infantryman and therefore did not meet the eligibility requirements for award of the Combat Infantryman Badge.  There is no evidence of record and he provides none to show that he was wounded in action. It is noted that the Bronze Star Medal was awarded for service, not for heroism.  Records at the U. S. Total Army Personnel Command do not verify that he was a prisoner of war.

3.  Regarding the applicant’s request for promotion to Sergeant First Class, E-7, without being able to review all the records, MOS/authorized-by-grade projections, and special instructions that were available to the promotion      board that considered him, the Board cannot make a comparison of his competitiveness compared to his peers.  However, it is noted that his last five EERs were below average (even the EERs that rated his characteristics as outstanding and excellent did not rate his promotion potential very highly).  It is also noted that the two Article 15s considered by the board that selected him for an HQDA bar to reenlistment were properly filed on his OMPF (as was the third Article 15 he received in 1973).  The Board is aware that he was considered for promotion during a time of drawdown after the Vietnam War and only the most highly qualified soldiers were recommended for promotion.  

4.  There are several omissions on the applicant’s DD Form 214 for the period ending 18 July 1974 in regards to his authorized awards and decorations.  He is authorized to wear one silver service star and one bronze service star on his Vietnam Service Medal.  He was awarded the National Defense Service Medal and the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal.  He was awarded the Expert Qualification Badge, Rifle M-16 during this rating period.  He was assigned to a unit during a period of time that unit was awarded the Meritorious Unit Commendation, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, and the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal, First Class Unit Citation and so these unit awards should be added to this DD Form 214, also.  

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.

NOTE:  The Army Review Boards Agency, Support Division will be directed to administratively correct the applicant’s DD Form 214 for the period ending         18 July 1974 by showing he was authorized to wear one silver service star and one bronze service star on his Vietnam Service Medal and that he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal; the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal; the 

Expert Qualification Badge, Rifle M-16; the Meritorious Unit Commendation; the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation; and the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal, First Class Unit Citation.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__RVO__  __  SK    _  _ _JPI  __  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002071862	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2002/07/18	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107.0014	
2.	107.0015	
3.	107.0111	
4.	131.00	
5.		
6.