PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:             22 May 2003                            
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR2003084994

	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. William Blakely		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.. 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Stanley Kelley . 		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 separation document (DD Form 214) be corrected by adding the Purple Heart (PH) and Bronze Star Medal (BSM) with Valor (“V”) Device. 

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that he served in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) as an infantryman and was assigned to a mechanized infantry unit.  He claims his unit was attacked by enemy forces and he received shrapnel wounds to his left shin when the Army Personnel Carrier (APC) he was in hit a large mine and was destroyed.  He further states that a medical aidman (MEDIC) removed the shrapnel, but his leg became infected and amputation of his leg was a possibility.  He indicates that he was young and dumb at the time, and he told authorities that he did not want the PH or any other Medal.  Accordingly, he never received the PH.  He states that he was unaware that the PH would carry more weight than a BSM with Valor (“V”) Device.  He further states that in reviewing his DD Form 214 he also notes that the BSM with “V” Device he earned is also not listed.  In support of his application, he submits his DD Form 214 and a copy of the orders and certificate that awarded him the (BSM) with
 “V” Device. 

4.  The applicant’s military records show that on 5 February 1969, he entered the Army for 2 years.  He was trained in, awarded, and served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (Infantryman).  He continuously served on active duty for 2 years, until being honorably separated on 4 February 1971. 

5. The applicant’s Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) confirms that he served in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) from 17 July 1969 to 15 July 1970.  During his tenure in the RVN, he performed duties in MOS 11B, and served with Company B, 1st Battalion, 28th Infantry Regiment, 1st Infantry Division and Company E, 2nd Battalion, 27th Infantry Regiment, 25th Infantry Division.  

6.  Block 40 (Wounds) of the applicant’s DA Form 20 is blank and contains no entry indicating that he was ever wounded in action.  Block 41 (Awards and Decorations) does not include the PH or the BSM with “V” Device in the list of earned awards.  The awards entered in this block include the following: Army Commendation Medal; Air Medal; National Defense Service Medal; Vietnam Service Medal; Combat Infantryman Badge; RVN Campaign Medal with 60 Device; and the BSM (2nd Oak Leaf Cluster). 

7.  The applicant’s Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) contains a copy of General Order (GO) Number 7494, dated 6 July 1070, issued by Headquarters, 
25th Infantry Division, RVN, which authorized the award of Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device to the applicant.  The MPRJ is also void of derogatory information that would preclude him from receiving the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM), and it contains no documents that indicate he was ever disqualified from receiving this award by any of the active duty unit commanders for which he served.

8.  Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant’s DD Form 214 lists the following awards he earned during his tenure on active duty:  Army Commendation Medal; Air Medal; National Defense Service Medal; Vietnam Service Medal with 2 bronze service stars; Combat Infantryman Badge; RVN Campaign Medal with 60 Device; and the BSM (2nd Oak Leaf Cluster.  The PH and the BSM with “V” Device are not included in this list of authorized awards.

9.  During the review of this case, the Department of the Army (DA) Vietnam Casualty Roster was reviewed to determine if the applicant was ever reported as a casualty while he was serving in the RVN.  His name was not included in this official DA list of RVN casualties.  

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy and criteria concerning individual military awards.  Paragraph 2-8 provides guidance on awarding the PH.  It states, in pertinent part, that the PH 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 required treatment by a medical officer, and this medical treatment must have been a matter of official record.  

11.  Chapter 4 contains guidance on the award of the AGCM and it states, in pertinent part, that this award is authorized for members 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 the case of the first award, in which case, a period of 1 or more years is considered a qualifying period if it is awarded at the termination of a period of Federal military service.  Although there is no automatic entitlement to the AGCM, disqualification must be justified.

12.  Department of the Army General Order Number 8, dated 1974, authorized the award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation to a personnel assigned to the United States Army Vietnam Or Military Assistance Command Vietnam and its subordinate units from 8 February 1962 to 28 March 1973.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Board notes the applicant’s contention that his DD Form 214 should corrected by adding the PH and the BSM with “V” Device to the list of awards in Item 24.  However, the Board is only able to confirm his entitlement to the BSM with “V” Device.

2.  The evidence of record confirms that orders were published awarding the applicant the BSM with “V” Device.  Thus, the Board concludes that it would be appropriate to add this award to his separation document at this time.

3.  By regulation, in order to support an award of the PH, it is necessary to establish that a member was wounded in action and 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.  

4.  The evidence of record gives no indication that the applicant sustained a combat wound or that he was ever awarded the PH.  Neither Item 40 (Wounds) of his DA Form 20 nor the DA Vietnam Casualty Roster provide verification that the applicant was ever wounded in action while serving in the RVN.  Therefore, the Board finds there is insufficient evidence to show that the applicant meets the regulatory criteria necessary to be awarded the PH.  Based on this lack of evidence, the Board is compelled to deny the applicant’s request for the PH in the interest of all those who served in the RVN and who faced similar circumstances. 

5.  During the review of this case, the Board found the applicant is entitled to other awards that were not included in his record.  The evidence of record confirms that he served a qualifying period of honorable service, from 5 February 1969 through 4 February 1971, that entitles him to the first award of the AGCM.  Lacking derogatory information on file or a specific disqualification by any of the active duty unit commanders for which he served, the Board concludes that it would be appropriate to add this award to his record at this time. 

6.  In addition, based on his service in the RVN, the applicant is entitled to the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation.  Thus, it concludes that it would also be appropriate to add these awards to his record at this time.

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 for the individual concerned be corrected by showing that he was awarded the Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device; by awarding him the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal, for his qualifying period of honorable active duty service from
 5 February 1969 through 4 February 1971; and by showing he is entitled to the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, for his qualifying service in the RVN; and by providing him a corrected separation document that reflects these awards.

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

BOARD VOTE:  

__ST__  ___GJW__  ___RO_  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		Raymond V. O’Conner, Jr.
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003084994	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED		
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	 	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	Partial Relief	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1. 61	107.0015	
2. 60 	107.0014	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.