PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF.

	BOARD DATE:             31 JULY 2003                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR2003085459

	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:

	Ms. Karen A. Heinz		Chairperson	
	Mr. Robert L. Duecaster 		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 he be awarded the Purple Heart (PH).  

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was wounded in action in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN).  He claims that he recently discovered that his sergeant had recommended that he receive the PH.  In support of his application, he submits a third party statement and a copy of a picture of himself and another soldier in the RVN.  

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he initially entered active duty in the Regular Army on 24 July 1967.  He was trained and served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 36K (Field Wireman) and he continuously served on active duty until being honorably separated on 23 March 1971.  

5.  The applicant’s Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) confirms that he served in the RVN from 28 June 1969 to 25 June 1970.  During this assignment, he performed duties in MOS 36K and he served with Headquarters and Headquarters Company and Company D, 2nd Battalion, 27th Infantry Regiment, 25th Infantry Division.  Block 40 (Wounds) is blank and contains no entry indicating that he was ever wounded in action.  Block 41 (Awards and Decorations) does not include the PH in the list of earned awards.  

6.  The applicant’s Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) contains no orders or documents indicating that he was ever recommended for or awarded the PH while he was serving in the RVN.  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 whom he served.

7.  Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant’s 23 March 1971 
DD Form 214 lists the following awards he earned during his tenure on active duty:  Bronze Star Medal; Army Commendation Medal; Air Medal; National Defense Service Medal; Vietnam Service Medal with 2 bronze service stars; and RVN Campaign Medal with 60 Device. The PH is not included in this list of authorized awards.

8.  The third party statement provided by the applicant is from an individual who claims that he served with the applicant and was present when the applicant was wounded in action by a mortar round while on bunker guard in the RVN.  This third party also indicates that medical personnel treated and bandaged the applicant’s wound after cleaning the blood from his face and hand.  He finally indicates that he had recommended the applicant for the PH at the time and just recently discovered the applicant had never received the award.  

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 he should be awarded the PH.  However, it finds an insufficient evidentiary basis to grant the requested relief.

2.  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.  

3.  The Board carefully considered the information provided in the third party 
statement provided by the applicant.  However, given the lack of any 
corroborating evidence of record or other independent sources, the Board finds 
this statement alone is not sufficient to meet the regulatory burden of proof 
necessary to support the award of the PH.

4.  The Board wishes to thank and congratulate the applicant for his outstanding combat service.  Further, it wishes to clarify that the veracity of his contention is not in question.  The Board’s determination is based solely on the lack of sufficient evidence supporting the applicant’s claim of entitlement to the PH.  This action is taken 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 24 July 1967 to 23 July 1970, 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 whom 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, the Board concludes that it would also be appropriate to add this award 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 be corrected by awarding the individual concerned the Army Good Conduct Medal, for his qualifying period of honorable active duty service from 24 July 1967 to 
23 July 1970; 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:  

__RLD___  __KH___  __GJ__  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

			Gail J. Wire
		      CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003085459	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED		
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	Partial Relief	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  61	107.0015	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.