PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:     

	BOARD DATE:           13 March 2003                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002071451

	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. Edmund P. Mercanti		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Thomas A. Pagan		Chairperson	
	Mr. Roger W. Able		Member	
	Mr. John A. Kelley		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 that his Purple Heart (PH) be added to his separation document.

3.  The applicant states that he has the award certificate for his PH, which proves that he was awarded that decoration.

4.  In support of his request, he submits a copy of the PH certificate he references, which states that he was wounded on 20 May 1968 in Vietnam.

5.  The applicant’s military records show that he was inducted and entered on active duty on 25 August 1967.

6.  He was awarded the military occupational specialty of military policeman and was promoted to pay grade E-4.  

7.  He served in Vietnam from 24 March to 19 December 1968.  While in Vietnam, he was awarded the secondary MOS of an infantryman and served as a rifleman in a cavalry unit.

8.  On 22 May 1968, the applicant, then in pay grade E-3, accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for sleeping while on guard duty.

9.  On 17 September 1968, the applicant was promoted to pay grade E-4.

10.  After his return to the United States, he was promoted to pay grade E-5 and was awarded the Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) by General Orders Number 971 dated 23 January 1969.  He was given a separation physical examination on 12 March 1969.  No wounds were listed or discovered during that examination.

11.  The applicant was honorably released from active duty at the expiration of his term of service on 22 August 1969.  The separation document he was issued shows that he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, the Combat Infantryman Badge, the Vietnam Service Medal, the Vietnam Campaign Medal, the Air Medal, and weapons qualification badges.

12.  The applicant’s DA Form 20, Enlisted Qualification Record, Item 40, Wounds, has no entries.  Also, there are no entries on this form which show that the applicant was disqualified for the Good Conduct Medal.

13.  In the processing of this case the Vietnam Casualty Roster was reviewed.  The applicant’s name does not appear on that report.  Also reviewed were the General Orders for the applicant’s unit.  There were no General Orders awarding the applicant the PH.

14.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides that the PH is awarded for wounds 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 by a medical officer, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.

15.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 also 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.  A record of punishment is not automatically disqualifying.  However, at that time, a single efficiency rating of less than excellent was disqualifying.  Although there is no automatic entitlement to the Good Conduct Medal, disqualification must be justified.  Current practice requires that the commander provide written notice of nonfavorable consideration and permits the individual to respond.  At that time, nonfavorable consideration was normally noted on the DA Form 20.

16.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3, Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register, shows the pertinent identified campaign periods, for which a bronze service star is authorized for wear on the Vietnam Service Medal, as follows:  Tet Counteroffensive Vietnam (30 January through 1 April 1968); Vietnam Counteroffensive, Phase V (1 July through 1 November 1968); and Vietnam Counteroffensive, Phase VI (2 November 1968 through 22 February 1969).  This pamphlet also provides that all Army units serving in Vietnam between 20 July 1965 and 28 March 1973 are authorized the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm.  

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  There is nothing in the applicant’s military records which shows that he was wounded.

2.  Centralized records from the Vietnam era show that he was not listed as a casualty, and that no orders were ever issued awarding him the PH.

3.  In the absence of documentation to substantiate the validity of the PH Certificate submitted by the applicant, it is not sufficient to grant his request.

4.  However, the applicant is entitled to three bronze service stars to his Vietnam Service Medal and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm.  

5.  The Board also considered whether the applicant should have been awarded the Good Conduct Medal.  On one hand, the applicant accepted NJP for sleeping on guard duty.  On the other hand, the applicant was promoted twice after he accepted NJP and was awarded the ARCOM.  Since nonfavorable consideration for the Good Conduct Medal was not noted on the applicant's DA Form 20, the Board will accept that the applicant was not awarded the Good Conduct Medal because of an administrative oversight.

6.  In addition, the applicant's ARCOM should be added to his separation document.

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:

	a.  awarding to the individual concerned three bronze service stars to his Vietnam Service Medal;

b.  awarding to him the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm; 

	c.  awarding to him the Good Conduct Medal for the period 25 August 1967 to 22 August 1969; and

	d.  adding these awards, along with the ARCOM which has already been awarded to the individual concerned, to his separation document.

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

BOARD VOTE:  

___tap___  ___rwa__  ____jak_  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		_________Thomas A. Pagan_________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002071451	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20020313	
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.	107.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.