PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           25 June 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002070267

	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. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Mr. Elzey J. Arledge, Jr.		Member	
	Mr. Thomas Lanyi		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 the social security account number (SSAN) listed in his separation document (DD Form 214) be corrected; and that the Purple Heart (PH) be added to his record. 

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that his DD Form 214 has the incorrect SSAN and that he was wounded in the Republic of Vietnam and the PH was not included in his record.  

4.  The applicant’s military records show that on 17 October 1966, he was inducted into the Army of the United States and entered active duty for 2 years.  The Record of Induction (DD Form 47) prepared on him at the time did not list a SSAN.  The service number was used as the primary form of identification in Army records during this period.  However, the Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) that was prepared on him upon his entry on active duty, 21 October 1966, does include a SSAN, along with his service number, in Item 1 (Name & Service Number).  The  SSAN recorded in Item 1 of the DA Form 20 contains a fifth digit of 6. 

5.  The applicant’s DA Form 20 shows that he successfully completed basic training at Fort Dix, New Jersey, advanced individual training at Fort Gordon, Georgia, and the basic airborne course at Fort Benning, Georgia.  Upon completion of his training, he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B1P (Infantryman/Parachutist).  It also confirms that he arrived in the RVN in December 1967, and was assigned to Company C, 2nd Battalion (Airborne), 
506th Infantry Regiment, to perform duties in MOS 11B1P, as a rifleman.  He served in the RVN for 10 months and participated in the following four campaigns:  Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase III; TET Counteroffensive; Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase IV; and Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase V.

6.  Item 40 (Wounds) of the applicant’s DA Form 20 is blank, which would indicate he was never wounded in action during his tenure on active duty.  In addition, Item 41 (Awards and Decorations) shows that he earned the following awards while serving on active duty:  National Defense Service Medal (NDSM); Parachutist Badge; Vietnam Service Medal (VSM); Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB); RVN Campaign Medal (RVNCM); Expert Marksmanship Badge (M-60); and Sharpshooter Marksmanship Badge (M-16).  The PH is not included in this list of earned awards, and there are no orders or documents contained in his Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) that show he was ever wounded in action or awarded the PH. 

7.  Item 38 (Record of Assignments) of the applicant’s DA Form 20 confirms that he received all “Excellent” conduct and efficiency ratings from all the unit’s in which he served while on active duty.  Further, the MPRJ contains no derogatory information that would disqualify him from receiving the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM) and there are no records or documents to show any of the unit commanders for which he service denied him this award.  

8.  On 10 October 1968, the applicant was honorably released from active duty after completing 1 year, 11 months, and 24 days of active military service.  The DD Form 214 issued to him on the date of his separation contains a SSAN that differs from the one recorded in his DA Form 20.  The fifth character of the SSAN listed in Item 3 (Social Security Number) of the DD Form 214 is 8, as opposed to 6, as is recorded in the DA Form 20 and elsewhere in his record.  Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) lists the following awards that he earned during his active duty tenure:  NDSM; VSM; RVNCM; and CIB.  The PH is not included in this list of authorized awards. 

9.  In support of his application, the applicant submits a copy of his social security card, which confirms that his SSAN is the same as the one recorded in Item 1 of his DA Form 20 and that the fifth digit is in fact 6, not 8 as indicated in his separation document.  

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes the Army’s awards policy.  Paragraph 2-8 contains guidance on awarding the PH.  It states, in pertinent part, that the PH is authorized to members who are wounded in action.  A wound is defined as an injury to any part of the body from an outside force or agent sustained in action.  The wound for which a PH is being awarded must have required treatment by a medical officer, and the records of medical treatment for the wound or injury for which the PH is being awarded must have been made a matter of official record. 

11.  Paragraph 2-13 contains guidance on awarding the VSM and it states, in pertinent part, that 1 bronze service star is authorized with this award for each campaign a member participated in while serving in the RVN.   Chapter 4 prescribes the policy for award of the AGCM and it states that this award is awarded for a period of exemplary behavior, efficiency, and fidelity in active Federal military service.  For the first award only, a period of more than 
1 year is considered a qualifying period, if given at the termination of a period of active Federal service.  It is the decision of the unit commander to award the AGCM, however, a specific disqualification action must be taken to deny the award.  

12.  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’s unit, 2nd Battalion, 506th Infantry Regiment, earned the following awards, for the periods indicated, as authorized in the Department of the Army General Orders (DAGO) listed, published in the year indicated:  Presidential Unit Citation, 13 June through 23 September 1968, DAGO 38, 1971; Army Meritorious Unit Commendation, 14 March through 3 October 1968, DAGO 22, 1976; Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, 31 January through 3 February 1968, DAGO 43,1970; and Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation, 3 October 1968 through 2 May 1970, DAGO 48, 1971.  

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Board notes the applicant’s contention that the SSAN listed in Item 3 (Social Security Number) of his DD Form 214 is incorrect, and it finds this claim has merit.  The evidence of record confirms that the fifth digit of the applicant’s SSAN is 6, as opposed to the 8 currently listed in his separation document.  This is confirmed by the social security card he provided and corroborated by his 
DA Form 20, which verifies this was his correct SSAN on the date his Enlisted Qualification Record was created.  Therefore, the Board concludes that the incorrect 5th digit of his SSAN currently listed in Item 3 of his DD Form 214 should be corrected at this time. 

2.  By regulation, in order to support an award of the PH, there must be evidence to confirm a member was wounded in action, the wound for which a PH is being awarded must have required treatment by a medical officer, and the records of medical treatment for the wound or injury for which the PH is being awarded must have been made a matter of official record.  

3.  The Board wishes to advise the applicant that while the veracity of his claim of entitlement of the PH is not in question, a careful review of his records has failed to provide sufficient evidence to support this contention.  While the Board wishes to congratulate the applicant on his outstanding record of combat service in the RVN, it is compelled to deny his request for the PH based on the lack of evidence and in the interest of fairness to all those who served in the RVN and who faced similar circumstances.  

4.  During the review of this case, the Board did discover that the applicant is entitled to awards that he did not request in his application, and it concludes it would be appropriate to correct his records to add these earned awards at this time.  The evidence of record confirms that the applicant is entitled to be awarded the first award of the AGCM for honorable active duty service from 
17 October 1966 through 10 October 1968.  

5.  In addition, based on his service in the RVN with the 2nd Battalion of the 
506th Infantry Regiment, he is entitled to the following unit awards:  Presidential Unit Citation; Meritorious Unit Commendation; Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation; Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation; and 4 bronze service stars for his VSM based on his campaign participation.  

6.  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 awarding the individual concerned the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal; showing that he earned the Presidential Unit Citation, Meritorious Unit Commendation, Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation, and 4 bronze service stars for his Vietnam Service Medal; amending Item 3 (Social Security Number) of his DD Form 214, dated 10 October 1968, by changing the fifth digit from 8 to 6; and 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:  

__JNS__  __EJA__  __TL___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		____John N. Slone   ___
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR20020700267	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2002/06/25	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	NA	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	NA	
DISCHARGE REASON	NA	
BOARD DECISION	PARTIAL GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  	100.0900	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.