RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           9 December 2003                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003087701

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Ms. Rosa M. Chandler		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Mark D. Manning		Chairperson	
	Mr. Raymond J. Wagner		Member	
	Ms. Eloise C. Prendergast		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).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:  

1.  The applicant requests that his records be corrected to show award of the Purple Heart (PH) and the Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM).  

2.  The applicant states that these awards were never added to his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States).  

3.  The applicant provides in support of his request a copy of his DD Form 214, a copy of his PH Certificate, and a Certificate for award of the ARCOM.  

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an error which occurred on 30 December 1966.  The application submitted in this case is dated 22 February 2003.  

2.  Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file within the 3-year statute of limitation if the ABCMR determines that it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  The applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States on 18 March 1965.  He served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 11E (Armor Crewman) and MOS 11 D (Armor Intelligence Specialist).  He served in Vietnam from approximately 13 August 1965 to 3 January 1966 with Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 1st Battalion, 5th Infantry Regiment, 25th Infantry Division. 

4.  Item 40 (Wounds) on the applicant's Enlisted Qualification Record is annotated to show "Laceration of Gum, 21 September 1966."

5.  The applicant's DD Form 214 shows that he was honorably separated on 30 December 1966 and that he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, Vietnam Service Medal, Vietnam Campaign Medal; the Combat Infantryman Badge and the Overseas Service Bar.  The applicant's DD Form 214 does not show the PH and the ARCOM as authorized awards.  

6.  Item 27 (Wounds Received as a Result of Action with Enemy Forces) on the applicant's DD Form 214 is annotated "NOT APPLICABLE."

7.  The PH Certificate provided by the applicant shows that he was wounded on 21 September 1966 and issued the PH on 22 September 1966.  The US Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) provided General Orders Number 1100, Headquarters 25th Infantry Division, dated 22 September 1966, that announces the applicant was awarded the PH due to a wound that he received on 21 September 1966.  

8.  A search of PERSCOM records failed to find evidence for award of the ARCOM.  The ARCOM Certificate the applicant provided shows that he was awarded the ARCOM for meritorious service in Vietnam from 19 January 1966 to 28 November 1966.  The ARCOM certificate was issued on 20 December 1966.  Major General Fred C. Weyand signed both award certificates.  The applicant's ARCOM Certificate contains a typographical error; his last name is incorrectly spelled xoxxxxxxxx instead of xaxxxxxxxx.

9.  Army Regulation (AR) 600-8-22 (Military Awards) sets forth Department of the Army criteria, policy and instructions concerning individual military awards, service medals and service ribbons, combat and special skill badges and tabs, unit decorations, and trophies and similar devices awarded in recognition of accomplishments.  The regulation provides, in pertinent part, that the PH is awarded for a wound sustained as a result of hostile action. Substantiating evidence must be provided to verify that:  (1) the wound was the result of hostile action; (2) the wound required medical treatment; and (3) the medical treatment was made a matter of official record.

10.  AR 600-8-22 provides that the ARCOM may be awarded to any member of the Armed Forces of the United States who, while serving in any capacity with the Army after 6 December 1941, distinguished himself or herself by heroism, meritorious achievement or meritorious service.  As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required.

11.  AR 600-8-22 authorizes award of a bronze service star, based on qualifying service, for each campaign listed in Appendix B of this regulation and states that authorized bronze service stars will be worn on the appropriate service medal.  The applicant participated in two campaigns -- Defense, 8 March-24 December 1965; and Counteroffensive, 25 December 1965-30 June 1966.

12.  The Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3, (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) shows that Department of the Army General Orders (DAGO) Number 48, dated 1971, awarded the Vietnam Gallantry Cross with 

Palm Unit Citation to the applicant’s unit and that DAGO Number 51, dated 1971 awarded the applicant's unit the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) Civil Actions Honor Medal.  The applicant's DD Form 214 does not show these awards because they were made after he had been separated.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Available orders support award of the PH.  Regulations in effect at the time provided that PH's were issued either by a hospital commander or by the commander of the unit to which the Soldier was assigned.  Normally, this meant that the Commanding General of the recipient's division signed the award certificate.  Major General Weyand, in 1966, was the Commanding General of the 25th Infantry Division.  Major General Weyand appropriately signed both the applicant's PH and ARCOM Certificates. 

2.  The ARCOM Certificate presented as evidence by the applicant is accepted as proof that he was awarded that decoration.  The  ARCOM Certificate shows that his last name is incorrectly spelled and it would be appropriate to issue him a new ARCOM Certificate showing the correct spelling of his last name.

3.  The evidence available also supports that it would be appropriate to correct the applicant's DD Form 214 to show award of the Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, the RVN Civil Actions Honor Medal, and two Bronze Service Stars for wear on his Vietnam Service Medal.

BOARD VOTE:

__mdm___  __rjw___  __ecp___  GRANT RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence available is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief and to excuse failure to timely file.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing the applicant's DD Form 214 is corrected to show award of the PH, the ARCOM, the Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, the RVN Civil Actions Honor Medal, and two Bronze Service Stars for wear on his Vietnam Service Medal.

2.  The Board also recommends that the applicant be issued a new ARCOM Certificate correctly spelling his last name.

			Mark D. Manning
		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003087701	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20031209	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(GRANT PLUS)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107.0015	
2.	107.0020	
3.	107.0094	
4.		
5.		
6.