RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:     

	BOARD DATE:           25 November 2003                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003088395

	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	
	Mr. Richard P. Nelson		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Ms. Lana E. McGlynn		Member	
	Ms. Yolanda Maldonado		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 correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show award of the Purple Heart.

2.  The applicant states that a colonel from the 2nd Battalion, 506th Infantry Regiment pinned a Purple Heart on his hospital robe but his medical records do not reflect this.  He further states that his medical records show he was wounded and was admitted to a military hospital for treatment of the wound.

3.  The applicant provides copies of: Standard Form 89 (Report of Medical History), pertaining to himself; pages 3 and 4 of DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record), pertaining to himself; and Reassignment Orders, dated 28 May 1968, pertaining to other service members.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of error that occurred on 21 May 1970.  The application submitted in this case is dated 19 March 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’s military records show that he was inducted on 22 May 1968. He completed basic and advanced individual training, where he trained in Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) 11B10 (Light Weapons Infantryman).  The applicant was assigned to Vietnam, where he served as a rifleman in Company B, 2nd Battalion, 506th Infantry, 101st Airborne Division from 1 November 1968 to 13 June 1969.  The applicant was then assigned in a patient status to Okinawa and from there to Korea.  On 16 October 1969, he returned to the United States and was honorably separated from active duty in pay grade E-4, on 21 May 1970.

4.  Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant’s DD Form 214 shows that he was awarded the Combat Infantryman Badge, the Army Commendation Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal with three bronze service stars, the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, the National Defense Service Medal and the Vietnam Campaign Medal.  No other awards or decorations are listed.

5.  The applicant’s name appears on the Vietnam Casualty Roster and indicates that he was wounded, as a result of hostile action, on 6 June 1969.

6.  Western Union Telegram, dated 9 June 1969, advises the applicant’s wife and mother that he was wounded on 6 June 1969 while on a combat operation when a hostile force was encountered.

7.  Item 40 (Wounds) of the applicant’s DA Form 20 indicates, “Frag wound right wrist” on 6 June 1969.

8.  Standard Form 600 (Chronological Record of Medical Care) entry, dated 6 June 1969, indicates that the applicant was treated for a fragmentation wound to the right hand at the 2nd Battalion Aid Station.  The entry further indicates that the applicant was sent to the 326th Medical Battalion for further treatment.

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22, Military Awards, provides, in pertinent part, that the Purple Heart is awarded to any member of an Armed Force who, while serving under competent authority in any capacity with one of the U.S. Armed Services after 5 April 1917, has been wounded or killed 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, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.

10.  U.S. Army Vietnam (USARV) Regulation 672-1 (Decorations and Awards) provided, in pertinent part, for award of the Purple Heart.  The regulation stated that authority to award the Purple Heart was delegated to hospital commanders.  Further, it directed that all personnel treated and released within 24 hours will be awarded the Purple Heart by the organization to which the individual is assigned. Personnel requiring hospitalization in excess of 24 hours or evacuation from Vietnam will be awarded the Purple Heart directly by the hospital commander rendering treatment.

11.  Headquarters, 101st Airborne Division General Orders Number 9443, dated 23 July 1969 announced award of the Bronze Star Medal to the applicant.

12.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides that the Good Conduct Medal is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency and fidelity during a qualifying period of active duty enlisted service.  This period is 3 years except in those cases when the period for the first award ends with the termination of a period of Federal military service.  Although there is no automatic entitlement to the Good Conduct Medal, disqualification must be justified.  

13.  There is no indication in the applicant’s personnel records that he was awarded the Good Conduct Medal.  There also is no evidence the applicant was disqualified by his unit commander for award of the Good Conduct Medal.  Records show the applicant’s conduct and efficiency were rated as “excellent” throughout his years of qualifying service and there is no indication of any disciplinary action being taken against him in his service personnel records.

14.  There is no indication in the applicant’s personnel records that he is entitled to any unit awards.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) lists the unit awards received by units that served in the Vietnam War.  This document shows the unit to which the applicant was assigned, was cited for award of the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal, First Class Unit Citation during the period 3 October 1968 through 2 May 1970 by Department of the Army General Orders (DAGO) Number 48, dated 1971 and for the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm, during the period 19 July 1968 through 4 May 1969 by DAGO 43, dated 1970.

15.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides that marksmanship badges are awarded to indicate the degree in which an individual has qualified in prescribed weapons firing courses or events.  The badges, listed from the highest to lowest degree of marksmanship, are the Expert Badge, the Sharpshooter Badge and the Marksman Badge.  Only the highest degree of marksmanship is listed on an individual's separation document.

16.  Headquarters, US Army Training Center, Infantry and Fort Lewis Special Orders Number 255, dated 12 September 1968, announced award of the Expert Marksmanship Badge, with Machine Gun Bar, to the applicant. 

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Evidence of record shows that the applicant was wounded, as a result of hostile action, on 6 June 1969.  The evidence further shows that the applicant received medical treatment for that wound.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his records to show award of the Purple Heart.

2.  General Orders show that the applicant was awarded the Bronze Star Medal. Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his records to show this decoration.

3.  Since there is no evidence that the applicant was disqualified for the Good Conduct Medal, he is entitled to the first award of the Good Conduct Medal based on completion of a period of qualifying service from 22 May 1968 through 21 May 1970.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his records to show this award.

4.  General Orders show that the applicant is entitled to award of the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal, First Class Unit Citation.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his records to show this unit award.

5.  General Orders show that the applicant is entitled to the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his records to show this unit award.

6.  Special Orders show that the applicant was awarded the Expert Marksmanship Badge, with Machine Gun Bar.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his records to show this badge

BOARD VOTE:

___lem__  ___ym __  ____rvo __  GRANT RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was 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 that the individual concerned was awarded:

a. the Purple Heart for wounds received on 6 June 1969;

b. the Bronze Star Medal;

c. the first award of the Good Conduct Medal;

d. the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal, First Class Unit Citation;

e. the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm; and

f. the Expert Marksmanship Badge, with Machine Gun Bar.

		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003088395	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20061125	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.