PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:            14 August 2003    
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR2003087100

	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. Raymond V. O’Connor		Chairperson	
	Mr. James E. Anderholm		Member	
	Ms. Linda M. Barker		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 his medical records will show that while serving in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN), he was rushed to the hospital to be treated for a wound he received to the left side of his face.  

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted in the Army and entered active duty on 20 June 1968.  He was trained in, awarded, and served in the Aircraft Maintenance military career field.  

5.  The applicant’s Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows that he served in the RVN from 20 December 1968 through 18 July 1970.  It further shows that during this RVN tour he was assigned to the 121st Aviation Company performing duties in MOS 67N as a UH-1 Helicopter Repairman, MOS 68F as an Aircraft Electrician, and MOS 67N2F as a Crew Chief.  

6.  Item 40 (Wounds) of the applicant’s DA Form 20 is blank and contains no entry.  Item 41 (Awards and Decorations) contains a list of the following awards he received during his tenure on active duty:  National Defense Service Medal (NDSM); Vietnam Service Medal (VSM); RVN Campaign Medal (RVNCM); Aircraft Crewman Badge; Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM); Soldier’s Medal; Air Medal (AM) with Valor (“V”) Device; and Marksman Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar.  

7.  The applicant’s Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) contains no orders or other documents showing that he was ever wounded or injured in action, or that he was ever recommended for the PH.  

8.  The MPRJ does contain a copy of a Record of Medical Examination (SF 88) that confirms the applicant took an expiration of term of service (ETS) physical examination on 30 April 1971.  The SF 88 gives no indication that he was wounded or injured in action.  It contains no entries in either the Significant or Internal History or Summary of Defects blocks, where an entry documenting any wound or injury received as a result of enemy action could be expected to be entered.  

9.  On 22 June 1971 the applicant was honorably REFRAD by reason of ETS.  At the time of his separation he held the rank of specialist five and he had completed a total of 3 years of active military service. 

10.  The separation document (DD Form 214) issued to the applicant on the date of his separation contains a list of awards he earned during his active duty tenure.  This list includes the following awards:  Soldier’s Medal; VSM; 
AM with “V” Device; ARCOM; NDSM; RVNCM; and Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar.  The applicant authenticated the DD Form 214 with his signature on the date of his separation, thereby verifying that the information contained therein was correct at the time it was prepared and issued.  

11.  In connection with the processing of this case, a member of the Board staff reviewed the Department of the Army (DA) Vietnam Casualty Roster, which contains the names of those soldiers wounded or injured in action in the RVN.  The applicant’s name was not included in this DA list of soldiers who were reported as RVN battle casualties.  

12.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy and criteria concerning individual military awards.  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 who has been wounded or killed in action. A wound is defined as an injury to any part of the body from an outside force or agent sustained under conditions defined by this regulation.  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.  

13.  Paragraph 2-13 of the awards regulation contains guidance on the Vietnam, Service Medal.  It states, in pertinent part, that a bronze service star is authorized with this award for each campaign a member is credited with participating in while serving in the RVN.  

14.  Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) establishes the eligibility of individual members for campaign participation credit, assault landing credit, and unit citation badges awarded during the Vietnam Conflict.  It confirms that during his tenure of assignment  in the RVN, the applicant was credited with participating in the following campaigns: Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase VI; TET 69 Counteroffensive 1969; Vietnam Summer-Fall 1969; Vietnam Winter-Spring 1970; and Sanctuary Counteroffensive 1970.  

15.  The Pamphlet also confirms that during his tour in the RVN, his unit 
(121st Aviation Company) earned the Meritorious Unit Commendation,  
RVN Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm, and RVN Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation.  

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Board notes the applicant’s contention that he is entitled to the PH.  However, it finds insufficient evidence to support this claim.  By regulation, in order to award the PH it is necessary to establish that a soldier was wounded in action, that the wound required treatment by a medical officer, and that the record of medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.

2.  The evidence of record provides no confirmation that the applicant was ever wounded in action or that he was ever treated for a wound or injury received in action.  The Board considered the applicant’s claim that he was hospitalized in the RVN.  However, given the absence of any indication of this medical treatment for a wound or injury received in action in the SF 88 documenting his ETS physical examination, coupled with the fact that his name is not included in the official DA Casualty Roster, the Board finds no evidentiary basis supporting his claim of entitlement to the PH.  

3.  In order to support an award of the PH, the wound or injury for which it is being awarded must have been incurred as a result of enemy action.  The applicant has failed to provide any independent evidence to show that this is the case.  Lacking any evidence to support his claim of entitlement to the PH, the Board must deny his request for the PH in the interest of all those who served in the RVN and who faced similar circumstances.  

4.  During its review of this case, the Board discovered that the applicant is entitled to awards that were not included in either his record or his separation document.  The record confirms that based on the tenure of his assignment in the RVN, he was credited with participating in five campaigns.  As a result, he is entitled to 5 bronze service stars with his VSM.  

5.  Further, while the applicant serving in the RVN, his unit earned the Meritorious Unit Commendation, RVN Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm Unit Citation, and RVN Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation.  Thus, the Board concludes that it would also be appropriate to add these awards to his record at this time. 

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 showing that the individual concerned is entitled to 5 bronze service stars with his Vietnam Service Medal, the Meritorious Unit Commendation Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, and Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation; 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:  

__JA___  ___LB__  __RO__  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		Raymond V. O’Connor
		   CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR	
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	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.