PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           19 July 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001053032

	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:

	Mr. Mark D. Manning		Chairperson	
	Mr. Lestor Echols		Member	
	Ms. Gail J. Wire		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 his records be corrected to show he earned the following awards:  Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB); MACV & 
101ST Airborne Patches; Bronze Star Medal (BSM), Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM); National Defense Service Medal (NDSM); Vietnam Service Medal (VSM); Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross (RVNGC); Republic of Vietnam 
Civil Actions Honor Medal (RVNCAHM); Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal (RVNCM); Meritorious Unit Citation (MUC); Presidential Unit Citation (PUC); Congressional Unit Citations; Air Medal (AM) with Valor (“V”) Device; Purple Heart (PH); Blue Infantry Braid; and Airborne and Infantry Insignia.  

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that he is a combat veteran of the Vietnam Conflict and served on active duty from May 1968 to June 1970 and in Vietnam during the calendar year of 1969.  He indicates that he served with two units in Vietnam, one of which was the 101st Airborne Division.  He claims to have flown in excess of 40 combat missions, which took him directly into combat in what are commonly referred to as firefights.  He also comments that during his tour in Vietnam he was wounded and medically evacuated to a hospital in country where he underwent surgery for his eyes and leg and was then medically evacuated to Japan.  He indicates that when he was discharged he pointed out to his commander that all his awards were not listed in his separation document but was told it could take up to 6 months to do the corrections and he would have to stay in the Army for them to be accomplished, so he elected to separate.  

4.  The applicant’s military records show that on 20 May 1968, he was inducted into the Army of the United States (AUS) for 2 years.  He completed basic training and advanced individual training at Fort Ord, California and upon completion was awarded military occupational specialty 11B (Infantryman) and he remained at Fort Ord for his first permanent duty station. 

5.  The applicant was reassigned to Vietnam where he arrived for duty on 
23 May 1969.  He was assigned to D Company, 2nd Battalion, 327th Infantry Regiment, from 11 June to 5 October 1969 and to Headquarters and Headquarters Company (HHC), 1st Brigade, 101st Airborne Division, from 
6 October to 3 November 1969.  

6.  The applicant’s record documents no acts of valor, significant achievement, or service warranting special recognition during his tour in Vietnam.  In addition, his Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) contains no documents or orders that suggest he was ever recommended for or received any individual awards or decorations during his tour in Vietnam, this includes the CIB and PH.  Further, there is no evidence of record that would confirm that he ever directly participated with his unit in active ground combat operations during his tour in Vietnam.  

7.  The applicant’s Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20), which he last audited on 25 February 1970, confirms in block 41 (Awards and Decorations) that during his active duty tenure he was awarded the NDSM, RVNCM, VSM, and 2 Overseas Bars.  Block 40 (Wounds) contains no entry, which would indicate that he was never wounded or injured in action.  

8.  The DA Form 20 also shows that he departed Vietnam on 3 November 1969, and was reassigned to the Camp Zama, Japan hospital as a patient; however, there is no medical or other evidence that would suggest this hospitalization was the result of a combat related wound or injury.  

9.  In January 1970, the applicant was reassigned to Fort Hood, Texas, where he served until being separated on 4 June 1970.  During this assignment, he accepted NJP for being AWOL for 3 days from 13 to 16 April 1970.  

10.  The Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge 
(DD Form 214), issued to and signed by the applicant on the date of his separation, confirms that he was separated on 4 January 1970 at the expiration of his term of service.  At the time of his separation he held the rank of specialist four/E-4, had completed a total of 2 years of creditable active military service, and was officially charged with accruing 16 days of time lost due to AWOL.  

11.  Block 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized ) of the applicant’s DD Form 214 confirms that during his tenure on active duty he was awarded the NDSM, VSM with 1 bronze service star, and the RVNCM.  No other awards, decorations, or badges are recorded in this separation document.  

12.  On 4 June 1970, the applicant was issued a correction to his DD Form 214 
(DD Form 215), which added the Meritorious Unit Emblem to block 24 of his original DD Form 214.  

13.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning individual military awards. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning individual military awards.  It states, in pertinent part, that to earn an individual award a solider must be recommended and the award must be approved by the established approval authority.  It also specifies that to be fully effective, an award must be timely and recommendations for awards should be submitted within 2 years of the act, achievement, or service to be honored.

14.  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.  A wound is defined 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.  

15.  Paragraph 8-6 contains guidance on award of the CIB and states, in pertinent part, that in order to eligible for the CIB a soldier must be personally present and under hostile fire while serving in an assigned infantry or special forces primary duty, in a unit actively engaged in ground combat with the enemy and specifically that battle or campaign participation credit alone is not sufficient; the unit must have been in active ground combat with the enemy during the period. 

16.  Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) provides guidance on determining or establishing the eligibility of individual members for campaign participation credit, assault landing credit, and unit citation badges awarded during the Vietnam Conflict.  It confirms that the applicant is entitled to the RVCGC with Palm, which was awarded to all units assigned or attached to Headquarters, United States Army Vietnam during the period 20 July 1965 to 28 March 1973 and to the RVNCAHM which was awarded to both the units he served in during his tenure in Vietnam, which included Headquarters & Headquarters Company, 1st Brigade, 101st Airborne Division and 2nd Battalion, 327th Infantry Regiment, for the period 18 March 1968 through 2 May 1970.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Board noted the applicant’s contention that he was entitled to several individual awards and decorations he earned during his tenure in Vietnam.  However, the Board was only able to confirm that he was authorized to receive the RVNGC with Palm and RVNCAHM, based on his service in Vietnam and it concludes it would be appropriate to add these awards to his records at this time. 

2.  The applicant’s MPRJ contains no documentation to show he was ever recommended for or awarded any of the individual awards to which he claims entitlement.  Lacking any evidence of record and given he has provided no independent evidence to support his entitlement claims, the Board concludes that, other than the two unit awards indicated in the preceding paragraph, the applicant is not authorized any of the awards to which he claims entitlement. 

3.  Notwithstanding the contention of the applicant, after carefully examining the available evidence of record and the independent evidence he submitted, the Board finds an insufficient evidentiary basis on which to support awarding the PH.  Although the record shows he was assigned to Japan as a patient, there is no medical evidence to confirm this was the result of his being wounded or injured in action.  

4.  By regulation, battle or campaign participation credit alone is not sufficient to award the CIB, which means that an assignment as an infantryman to an infantry unit in Vietnam is not in and of itself adequate justification for awarding the CIB.  There must be evidence that the unit was in ground combat with the enemy during the period and a member had to be personally present with the unit during this ground combat in order to qualify for the CIB.  

5.  Although the applicant was an infantryman assigned to an infantry unit in Vietnam, the Board finds no evidence of record and he has provided no independent evidence that confirms he was ever personally present and under hostile fire while his unit was actively engaged in ground combat with the enemy. Therefore, the Board has an insufficient evidentiary basis on which to support awarding the CIB and is compelled to deny this requested relief. 

6.  Finally, the applicant is advised that patches, braids, and insignia are unit wear items and not designated awards or decorations that require military record entries.  Therefore, any relief requested in regard to these type items is not within the purview of nor was it addressed by the Board. 

7.  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 earned the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm and the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal for his Vietnam service and by issuing him a corrected separation document that reflects these changes. 

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

BOARD VOTE:  

__MDM__  __ LE  __  __GJW__  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		  __Mark D. Manning__
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001053032	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2001/07/19	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1970/06/04	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200	
DISCHARGE REASON	ETS	
BOARD DECISION	GRANT PARTIAL	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  46	107.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.