PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:          18 November 2003    
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2003087420

	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	
	Ms. Wanda L. Waller		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Mr. Mark D. Manning		Member	
	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		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 award of the Purple Heart.

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that he injured his right eye on 20 November 1966 in Vietnam.  He contends that he took a "ricochet," had glass in his eye and that he was medically evacuated on 21 November 1966 to the battalion area where a doctor examined his injury.  He also contends that the commanding officer and medic put him in for award of the Purple Heart; however, the captain was shot and the medic was killed.  The applicant did not provide any evidence in support of his claim.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he served in the U.S. Marine Corps from 28 June 1957 to 27 June 1960.  He enlisted in the Regular Army on 
6 January 1964 for a period of 3 years.  The applicant served as an infantry indirect fire crewman assigned to Company B, 1st Battalion of the 35th Infantry in Vietnam from 28 December 1965 through 14 December 1966.  On 14 December 1966, the applicant was honorably discharged in the rank of staff sergeant after completing 2 years, 11 months, and 9 days of creditable service with no lost time.  
5.  The applicant's DD Form 214 shows the Combat Infantryman Badge, the Vietnam Service Medal, the Vietnam Campaign Medal, the National Defense Service Medal, the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar, and the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Pistol Bar as authorized awards.

6.  There is no evidence in the applicant’s service personnel records that he was awarded the Purple Heart or was wounded as a result of hostile action in Vietnam.

7.  The applicant's DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) does not reflect entitlement to the Purple Heart and item 40 (Wounds) on his DA Form 20 is blank.  The applicant’s name does not appear on the Vietnam Casualty Roster.

8.  There is no evidence the applicant received the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.  There also is no evidence the applicant was disqualified by his chain of command from receiving the Army Good Conduct Medal.  His records do not contain any adverse information and he received conduct and efficiency ratings of “excellent” throughout his service.

9.  The applicant's service personnel records show that he participated in two campaigns during his assignment in Vietnam.

10.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) shows the applicant's unit is entitled to award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation based on Department of the Army General Orders Number 48, dated 1971.
11.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part, that the Purple Heart 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 must have required treatment, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.

12.  Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time, provided policy and criteria concerning individual military decorations.  It stated that the Army Good Conduct Medal was awarded for each 3 years of continuous enlisted active Federal military service completed on or after 27 August 1940 and, for the first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June 1950 of less than 3 years but more than 1 year.  At the time, a soldier's conduct and efficiency ratings must have been rated as "excellent" for the entire period of qualifying service except that a service school efficiency rating based upon academic proficiency of at least "good" rendered subsequent to 22 November 1955 was not disqualifying.  However, there was no right or entitlement to the medal until the immediate commander made a positive recommendation for its award and until the awarding authority announced the award in General Orders.

13.  Army Regulation 600-8-22, in pertinent part, authorizes award of a bronze service star, based on qualifying service, for each campaign listed in Appendix B of this regulation and states that authorized bronze service stars will be worn on the appropriate service medal.  
 
CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Board considered the applicant's contention that he should be awarded the Purple Heart for an eye injury sustained on 20 November 1966 in Vietnam.  However, there is no evidence of record available to the Board, and the applicant has provided no evidence, which shows that he was wounded or treated for any wounds or injuries sustained as a result of hostile action in Vietnam.  Therefore, the Board determined that there is insufficient evidence on which to base award of the Purple Heart in this case.  

2.  Considering the applicant attained the rank of staff sergeant in less than three years, the Board concludes the applicant met eligibility criteria for the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 6 January 1964 through           14 December 1966 based on completion of a period of qualifying service ending with the termination of a period of Federal military service.  Therefore, the applicant's DD Form 214 should be corrected to show this award.

3.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows the Vietnam Service Medal as an authorized award.  However, evidence of record shows the applicant participated in two campaigns during his assignment in Vietnam which are not correctly shown by award of two bronze service stars for wear on his Vietnam Service Medal.  Therefore, in accordance with the governing regulation, the applicant is entitled to the Vietnam Service Medal with two bronze service stars and correction of his DD Form 214 to show these awards.   

4.  The applicant's unit received the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation while he was assigned to it.  Therefore, this unit award should also be added to his DD Form 214.

5.  In view of the foregoing findings and conclusions, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant’s records but only as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by awarding the applicant the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 6 January 1964 through 14 December 1966.

2.  That the applicant's DD Form 214 be corrected by showing that he was awarded the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal with two bronze service stars, and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation.

3.  That so much of the application as pertains to award of the Purple Heart be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

JNS____  MDM____  BJE_____  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		____John N. Slone________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003087420	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20031118	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107.0015	
2.	107.0000	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.