PROCEEDINGS


         IN THE CASE OF:
        

         BOARD DATE: 27 September 2001
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2001058621


         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. Eric N. Andersen		Member
Mr. Thomas E. O’Shaughnessy, Jr.		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 the Purple Heart (PH) and all other awards to which he is entitled be added to his military records.

3. The applicant states, in effect, that his separation document (DD Form 214) does not show he was awarded the PH and other combat medals he earned during his active duty tenure. In support of his application, he refers to a Department of Veterans Affairs claim, number 319/213. However, he failed to provide this document with his application.

4. The applicant’s military records show that on 14 September 1966, he was inducted into the Army for 2 years. He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (Light Weapon Infantryman) and upon completion of his training he was assigned to the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) for his first permanent duty station.

5. On 27 February 1967, the applicant arrived in the RVN and during his assignment tenure he served in MOS 11B (Rifleman) with the following units for the periods indicated: 7 March-18 March 1967, A Company, 2^nd Battalion,
12^th Cavalry Regiment, 1^st Cavalry Division; 19 March-5 August 1967,
C Company, 2^nd Battalion, 5^th Cavalry Regiment, 1^st Cavalry Division; 6 August-22 August 1967-Headquarters Company, 2^nd Battalion, 5^th Cavalry Regiment
1^st Cavalry Division; and 7 September 1967-22 February 1968, B Company,
2^nd Battalion, 5^th Cavalry Regiment, 1^st Cavalry Division.

6. On 22 February 1968, he departed the RVN and returned to Fort Campbell, Kentucky, where he served until 13 September 1968, when he was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD) in the rank of sergeant/E-5. His Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) confirms that during his tour in the RVN he participated in two campaigns, Vietnam Counter Offensive Phases II and III. It also shows that he earned the following awards while he was on active duty: Army Commendation Medal; Vietnam Service Medal; RVN Campaign Medal with 60 Device; and National Defense Service Medal. The DA Form 20 makes no reference to his ever having earned the PH and block 40 (wounds) contains no entry, which would tend to indicate he was never wounded or injured in action.

7. The DD Form 214 issued to and authenticated by the applicant on the date of his separation contains no entry that would indicate he was ever wounded or injured in action or that he received the PH. In addition, the Report of Medical Examination (SF 88) and Report of Medical History (SF 89), both dated
20 August 1968, document the applicant’s medical history and confirm that he was medically cleared for separation by competent medical authority. Neither form gives any indication that he was ever treated by military medical personnel for a wound or injury he received in action.

8. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part, that the PH is awarded for a wound sustained as a result of hostile action. In order to support an award of the PH there must be evidence to show a member was wounded as the result of hostile action, that this wound required medical treatment by military medical personnel, and that this medical treatment was made a matter of official record.

9. Paragraph 2-13 of the awards regulation provides guidance on the Vietnam Service Medal and specifies, in pertinent part, that one bronze service star is authorized for wear with the award for each campaign participated in.

10. Paragraph 8-6 contains guidance and criteria for awarding the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB). It states, in pertinent part, that the CIB is awarded to members who have served in an infantry MOS and engaged in active ground combat while assigned or attached to an infantry unit of brigade, regimental or smaller size. During the Vietnam era the CIB was authorized for enlisted members who met the criteria who held one of the following infantry MOS: 11B, 11C, 11F, 11G, or 11H.

11. 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. This publication confirms that the applicant’s unit,
1^st Calvary Division, was awarded the RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm for the period 9 August 1965 through 19 May 1969, which covered the period of his assignment tenure.

CONCLUSIONS:

1. The Board notes the applicant’s contention that he is entitled to receive the PH. However, by regulation, in order to award the PH it must be shown that a member was wounded or injured in action, was treated for that wound by military medical personnel, and this treatment must have been made a matter of official record.

2. The DD Form 214 authenticated by the applicant upon his separation and his DA Form 20 give no indication that he was ever awarded the PH. In addition, the applicant’s medical examination documents also contain no information that would verify he ever sustained a combat wound that was treated by military medical personnel and made a matter of official record.

---

3. While the Board wishes to congratulate the applicant on his outstanding record of combat service, in this case, the evidence of record does not show he was ever wounded or injured in action. Therefore, lacking independent evidence to the contrary, the Board is compelled to conclude the regulatory burden of proof necessary to confirm his PH entitlement has not been met.

4. The Board did find that the evidence of record sufficiently documents the applicant’s participation in combat as an infantryman, assigned to an infantry unit, who had been involved in combat operations during his assignment tenure in the RVN. Therefore, the Board concludes it would be appropriate to correct his record to show he earned the CIB.

5. In addition, the applicant’s record confirms that during his assignment tenure in the RVN he participated in two campaigns, which entitles him to two bronze service stars for wear with his VSM, and that he served in a unit that earned the RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm. Therefore, the Board concludes it would 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 the individual concerned earned the Combat Infantryman Badge, Vietnam Service Medal with two bronze service stars, and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm and by providing him a corrected separation document that reflects these changes.

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

__RVO___ __ENA__ __TEO__ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION




                  __Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr._
                  CHAIRPERSON

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001058621
SUFFIX
RECON	YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED	2001/09/27
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.