PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:                 5 January 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:        AR1999022770

	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.  

	Ms. Joyce A. Wright		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Erin J. Olmes		Chairperson	
	Mr. John D. Miller		Member	
	Mr. James M. Alward		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 award of the Purple Heart.

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was shot down by gunfire about a week before he was to rotate home.  He also states that he received a broken pelvis and broken ribs.  In support of his application he submits a copy of VA Form 
21-6782 (Disability Compensation). 

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he entered active duty on 8 April 1969 as a light weapons infantryman (11B).  He served in Vietnam from 8 September 1969 to 30 June 1970 and was honorably discharged on 7 April 1971.

5.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows that he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal with three bronze service stars, the Combat Infantryman Badge, the Army Commendation Medal, the Sharpshooter Qualification Badge (Rifle M-16) and the Expert Qualification Badge (Rifle M-14).  His discharge document does not show the Purple Heart as an authorized award.

6.  There is no record that the applicant was awarded the Purple Heart.  There also is no indication in the applicant’s service personnel records that he was wounded as a result of hostile action.  His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows the entry in item 40 (Wounds) “Back Injury – Helicopter Crash –RVN 23 JUN 70”.

7.  The VA Form 21-6782 provided by the applicant shows that he was granted
10 percent disability for his back injury.

8.  The Board notes that he is entitled to the Army Commendation Medal with “V” Device and the first award of the Good Conduct Medal for the period 8 April 1969 to 7 April 1971, which are not shown on his discharge document.

9.  A DA Form 1577 (Authorization for Issuance of Awards), dated 26 August 1999, shows the National Personnel Records Center in St. Louis, Missouri, determined the applicant was entitled to the Vietnam Campaign Medal with 
60 Device.

10.  Headquarters, 4th Infantry Division, General Orders Number 3120, dated 1 June 1970 awarded the Army Commendation Medal with “V” Device to the applicant.

11.  There is no indication in the applicant’s personnel records that show he was awarded the Good Conduct Medal.  There also is no evidence that the applicant was disqualified by his unit commander for award of the Good Conduct Medal.
However, his records show that he received excellent conduct and efficiency rating during his entire period of service.  There is no evidence of derogatory information contained in the available records.

12.  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, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.

13.  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.  

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Evidence of record shows that he received a back injury from a helicopter crash on 23 June 1970 while serving in Vietnam.  Therefore, he is entitled to
award of the Purple Heart and correction of his records to show this award.

2.  Evidence of record shows the applicant was awarded the Army Commendation Medal with “V” Device.  Evidence of record also shows that the
“V” Device was omitted from the applicant’s DD Form 214.  Therefore, his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show the entry “Army Commendation Medal with /”V”.

3. The applicant is entitled to the first award of the Good Conduct Medal for the period 8 April 1969 to 7 April 1971 based on a completion of a period of qualifying service ending with the termination of a period of Federal military service.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his records to show this award.

4.  The applicant was awarded the Vietnam Campaign Medal with 60 Device.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his records to show this award.

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

RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing in item 24 (Decorations and Awards) of his DD Form 214 that he was awarded the Purple Heart, the Army Commendation Medal w/”V”, the first award of the Good Conduct Medal for the period 8 April 1969 to 7 April 1971 and the Vietnam Campaign Medal with 60 Device.

BOARD VOTE:  

EJO_____  JDM____  JMA____  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		Erin J. Olmes_________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999022770	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20000105	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19710407	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .635-200	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  61		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.