PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            31 JULY 2003                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002079119

	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. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Gail J. Wire		Chairperson	
	Ms. Karen A. Heinz		Member	
	Mr. Robert L. Duecaster		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 records be corrected to reflect award of the Purple Heart.  He states he was treated for shrapnel wounds to his chest, sustained on 20 July 1969 while in Vietnam.  He states that he was not allowed to follow-up on the "paperwork" because of heavy casualties and because he was "discharged on a holiday" he was not permitted to enter the incident on a Department of the Army Form 1811 (Physical Data and Aptitude Test Score Upon Release from Active Duty).  In support of his request he submits a copy of a Department of the Army Form 2658 (Health Record – Abstract of Service).

3.  Records available to the Board indicate that the applicant entered active duty on 13 May 1968.  Upon completion of training as a cannoneer (13A) he was briefly assigned to Fort Bragg, North Carolina and on 4 July 1969 he was assigned to the 23rd Administration Company in Vietnam.  He was initially assigned as a student, and on 18 July 1969 he assumed duties as a postal clerk (71F) with the Administration Company.  

4.  The Department of the Army Form 2658, which the applicant submitted in support of his request, indicates that he was treated at the "Americal Dispensary" on 20 July 1969.  The document does not indicate the basis for his medical treatment or indicate that he was being treated for wounds sustained as a result of hostile action.  No other medical records were available to the Board, or provided by the applicant.

5.  The applicant departed Vietnam in February 1970 and on 22 February 1970, a Sunday, he was released from active duty at Fort Lewis, Washington in pay grade E-4, with an honorable characterization of service.  The Department of the Army Form 1811, which was completed as part of his separation action, indicates that his physical profile was 1-1-1-1-1-1, and that he was considered physically qualified for separation or for reenlistment without re-examination.  There is no space on the form to record any previous medical treatment.

6.  Neither the applicant's separation document, nor his Department of the Army Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) reflect entitlement to the Purple Heart and item 40 (wounds) on his Department of the Army Form 20 is blank.  

7.  On 13 January 1981 the applicant submitted an initial claim for compensation from the Department of Veterans Affairs.  He noted that he had been treated in July 1969 for "keloids on chest."  He made no mention of treatment for any combat incurred injuries. 

8.  The American Medical Association notes that a keloid is an abnormal scar that is thicker, different color and texture, extends beyond the edge of the wound, and has a tendency to recur.  It often creates a thick, puckered effect simulating a tumor.  Keloids are removed at the point where it meets normal tissue. Medications (topical corticosteroids, anesthetic ointments, and antihistamine creams) can reduce the symptoms of itching and tenderness of keloids.  

9.  A review of the historical files of the 23rd Administration Company, maintained at the National Archives in College Park, Maryland, by a member of the Board's staff, failed to confirm that the applicant was entitled to the Purple Heart.  His name is not among a list of individuals reported as combat casualties during the Vietnam War.

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that the Purple Heart 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.

11.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 also provides that the Army 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.  Although there is no automatic entitlement to the Army 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.  There is no evidence in the applicant's official military personnel file that his commander ever disqualified him for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.  There is also no evidence of any misconduct or disciplinary actions in the applicant's file.  His conduct and efficiency ratings throughout his military service were excellent.

12  A review of Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 notes that the applicant's unit (23rd Administration Company) was awarded two Meritorious Unit Commendation, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm, and participated in three designated campaigns (TET 69 Counteroffensive, Vietnam Summer-Fall 1969, Vietnam Winter-Spring 1970), while the applicant was a member of the organization.  The unit awards were omitted from his separation document and his participation in the three designated campaigns should be reflected as bronze service stars on his Vietnam Service Medal.

CONCLUSIONS:

1. The Board notes that the applicant arrived in Vietnam on 4 July 1969.  The medical document submitted in support of his request notes he was treated on 20 July 1969.  According to information provided by the applicant in 1981 to the Department of Veterans Affairs, he was treated for keloids on his chest in July 1969.  In order for the keloids to have developed the injury which resulted in the keloids would have had to occur significantly earlier than the date he sought treatment in order for the scars to develop and thicken into keloids.  It is unlikely that a shrapnel wound to the chest on 20 July 1969 would have developed into the keloids the applicant indicated he received treatment for in July 1969.

2.  Although the applicant may have received medical treatment while in Vietnam, there is no evidence which confirms the applicant was wounded as a result of hostile action.  In the absence of such evidence, the Board concludes there is insufficient evidence on which to base an award of the Purple Heart.  

3.  The applicant completed a qualifying period of service for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal on 22 February 1970.  There is no evidence his commander ever disqualified him from receiving the award and no evidence of any misconduct which would justify denying him the award.  In view of the foregoing, the Board concludes that the applicant met the basic qualifications for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal and it would be appropriate and in the interest of equity to award him that decoration for the period 13 May 1968 through 22 February 1970.

4.  The Board notes that the applicant is also entitled to two Meritorious Unit Commendations, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm, and the three bronze service stars on his Vietnam Service Medal.  His records should be corrected accordingly.

5.  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:

a.  by awarding the individual concerned the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 13 May 1968 through 22 February 1970; and

b.  by showing that he is entitled to two Meritorious Unit Commendations, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm, and the three bronze service stars on his Vietnam Service Medal.  

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

BOARD VOTE:  

__GJW__  ___KAH _  __RLD __  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		_____ Gail J. Wire______
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002079119	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20030731	
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.