PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            8 February 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000047891

	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. Joseph A. Adriance		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. JoAnn H. Langston		Chairperson	
	Mr. George D. Paxson		Member	
	Mr. Donald P. Hupman, Jr.		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, in effect, that he be awarded the Purple Heart (PH). 

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was injured and treated for injuries he received to his arms from a fifty caliber barrel that was being fired.  He claims to have scars from these wounds and that a medic treated him but he never received the PH.  He indicates that he believes his medical records will reveal this occurred although no award was ever granted.  He claims to have requested his medical records but believes they may be at the Baltimore, Maryland Regional Office of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).  

4.  The applicant’s military records show that on 17 September 1968, he enlisted in the Regular Army for 2 years in an enlisted status.  He successfully completed basic and advanced individual training at Fort Dix, New Jersey and was assigned to Fort Benning, Georgia to attend the Officer Candidate School (OCS).

5.  Upon his successful completion of OCS he was discharged from his enlisted status and on 1 August 1969, he was appointed a second lieutenant (2LT) in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) and concurrently called to active duty.  At this time he was assigned to Fort Knox, Kentucky to attend the Armor Officer Basic Course, which he completed in October 1969.  

6.  He remained assigned to Fort Knox until September 1970 when he was reassigned to Vietnam, where he arrived for duty in October 1970.  He served in Vietnam until the end of May 1971 when he was reassigned to the United States for separation processing. 

7.  The applicant’s Department of the Army (DA) Form 66 (Officer Qualification Record), which the applicant verified on 18 February 1971, contains no entries in the awards and decoration block, assignment limitations block, or the remarks block that alludes to his ever having been wounded in action against an enemy force during his assignment in Vietnam.  His military medical record was not a part of service records provided and was not available to the Board for review. 

8.  The Department of Defense (DD) Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) issued to and authenticated by the applicant with his signature on 8 June 1971, the date of his separation, is void of any reference to his ever being wounded in action or having been awarded the PH during his tenure on active duty. 

9.  The separation document does verify that on 8 June 1971, the applicant was honorably separated from active duty, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-100, by reason of expiration of his active duty commitment.  At the time of his separation he had completed 1 year, 10 months, and 8 days of active military service and had earned the National Defense Service Medal, Vietnam Campaign Medal, Vietnam Service Medal, and Army Commendation Medal.  
10.  On 22 June 1971, subsequent to the applicant’s separation, General Order (GO) Number 06983, issued by Headquarters, 23th Infantry Division, was published and awarded him the Bronze Star Medal (BSM) for his service in Vietnam from 1 July 1970 through 31 May 1971.

11.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning individual military awards.  Paragraph 2-8 contains the regulatory guidance pertaining to awarding the PH.  It states, in pertinent part, that the PH is awarded to any member wounded or killed while engaged in action against an armed enemy or hostile force.  

12.  Paragraph 9-8b (2) defines a wound as an injury to any part of the body from an outside force or agent while engaged in action against the enemy.  It also specifically states that in order to support awarding a member the PH, it is necessary to establish that the wound, for which the award is being made, required treatment by a medical officer.  This treatment must be supported by records of medical treatment for the wound or injury received in action, and must have been made a matter of official record.  

13.  Paragraph 9-8b (3) stipulates, that when contemplating an award of the 
PH, the key issue that commanders must take into consideration is the degree to which the enemy caused the injury.  The fact that the proposed recipient was participating in direct or indirect combat operations is a necessary prerequisite, but is not sole justification for award.  

14.  Department of the Army (DA) Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Campaign Participation Credit Register) establishes the eligibility of individual members for campaign participation credit, assault landing credit, and unit citation badges awarded during the Vietnam Conflict.  It shows that the applicant’s unit was awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with palm, via DAGO Number 55, published in 1971.  

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Notwithstanding the contention of the applicant, after carefully examining the available evidence of record and the independent evidence submitted by him, the Board finds an insufficient evidentiary basis on which to support awarding the PH.  

2.  While the Board wishes to commend the applicant on his exemplary service during the Vietnam Conflict, it is compelled to deny the requested relief.  The available evidence contains no information to support his claim of entitlement to the PH and there are no medical records available that verify that he was treated for a wound received in action by a medical officer or that this treatment was made a matter of official record. 
3.  Further, the available evidence suggests the applicant never raised the PH issue while he was still on active duty or at the time of his separation, when he was issued and signed a DD Form 214 that did not list the PH as an earned award.

4.  The evidence or record shows the applicant is entitled to the RVNGC with palm, for his service with his unit in Vietnam.  This entitlement was established in DAGO 55, which was published in 1971.  In addition, he was awarded a BSM for service, from 1 July 1970 through 31 May 1971, via GO Number 06983, dated 
22 June 1971, published by Headquarters, 23rd Infantry Division.  Although these awards were authorized subsequent to the applicant’s separation, the Board concludes it would be appropriate to provide them to him at this time. 

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

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing the individual concerned was awarded the BSM for meritorious service in connection with military operations against an armed enemy force in Vietnam for the period 1 July 1970 through 31 May 1971; the RVNGC with palm, for his valorous combat achievement during his tenure in Vietnam; and his separation document (DD Form 214) should be corrected to reflect these changes. 

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

___dh___  ___jhl___  __gp____  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		___JoAnn H. Langston____
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000047891	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2001/02/08	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1971/06/08	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-100	
DISCHARGE REASON	ETS	
BOARD DECISION	GRANT PARTIAL 	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  41	107.0000	
2.  61	107.0015	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.