PROCEEDINGS


         IN THE CASE OF:
        

         BOARD DATE: 17 January 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2001062197


         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. Jennifer L. Prater		Chairperson
Mr. Christopher J. Prosser		Member
Mr. Kenneth W. Lapin		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 his military records be corrected to show he was awarded the Purple Heart (PH).

3. The applicant states, in effect, that his ring finger was removed from his right hand in Vietnam after he was injured as a result of jumping from the top of a conex container when rockets and mortar fire hit his work site.

4. The applicant’s military records show that on 8 December 1967, he enlisted into the Army for 3 years. He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty 76Y (Supply Specialist) and he continuously served on active duty for
2 years, 9 months, and 1 day, until being honorably separated on 8 September 1970.

5. The applicant’s Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows that the highest rank he attained while serving on active duty was sergeant/E-5
(SGT/E-5). It also confirms that he served in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN), from 27 November 1968 to 4 November 1969, and that during his assignment tenure there he participated in 2 campaigns. Block 40 (Wounds) is blank and contains no entry that would indicate that he was ever wounded or injured in action. In addition, his Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) is void of any official orders or other documents that would suggest he was ever recommended for or awarded the PH.

6. Block 41 (Awards and Decorations) of the applicant’s DA Form 20 does not include the PH in the awards listed. However, it does show that he earned the following awards during his active duty tenure: National Defense Service Medal; Vietnam Service Medal; and RVN Campaign Medal with 60 Device.

7. The applicant’s Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) contains no derogatory information and there is no indication that he was ever disqualified from receiving the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM) by any of the unit commanders for which he served during his tenure on active duty.

8. The OMPF does include Statement of Medical Examination and Duty Status (DA Form 2173) that indicates the applicant jumped from a conex container in an attempt to disengage a strap holding it to a fork lift. His jumping from the conex container resulted in the ring finger of his right hand being caught on the metal edge and caused the traumatic amputation of that finger. The DA Form 2173 provided no indication that this injury was received as a result of or was related to any specific enemy action.

---

9. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy, criteria, and administrative instructions 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 wounded or killed while engaged in action against an armed enemy or hostile force.

10. Paragraph 2-8b defines a wound as an injury to any part of the body from an outside force or agent while engaged in action against the enemy. It also specifically states that 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.

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

12. Chapter 4 provides guidance on awarding the AGCM and it states, in pertinent part, that it is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency and fidelity during a qualifying period of active duty enlisted service. The normal qualifying period is 3 years; however, in the case of the first award, the qualifying period is 1 or more years when it is awarded at the termination of a period of Federal military service. There is no automatic entitlement to the AGCM; however, disqualification must be justified.

13. 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 all personnel assigned to United States Army Vietnam or Military Assistance Command Vietnam and its subordinate units from 8 February 1962 to 28 March 1973.

CONCLUSIONS:

1. Notwithstanding the contention of the applicant, after carefully examining the evidence of record and the independent evidence submitted by the applicant, the Board finds an insufficient evidentiary basis on which to support awarding the PH.

2. The evidence of record verifies that the applicant’s ring finger on his right hand was amputated as a result of jumping off a conex container in Vietnam, however, it does not provide confirmation that this injury was received as a result of action against the enemy.

3. Further, in the opinion of the Board, given the applicant was treated by military medical personnel, had there been sufficient medical evidence to support his receiving the PH, it would have been recommended at the time of his treatment. Thus, while the Board wishes to commend the applicant on his exemplary service in the RVN, it is compelled to deny award of the requested PH.

4. Lacking any derogatory information on file in the applicant’s record or a specific disqualifying action from any of his unit commanders, the Board concludes the applicant served a qualifying period of honorable service that entitles him to receive the first award of the AGCM. In addition, the Board finds that his service in the RVN and his participation in two campaigns entitles him to 2 bronze service stars with his Vietnam Service Medal and to the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation. Therefore, the Board finds that it would be appropriate to add these awards to his records at this time.

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 by awarding the individual concerned the Army Good Conduct Medal for his honorable service from 8 December 1967 to 8 September 1970; by showing he earned 2 bronze service stars for his Vietnam Service Medal; by showing he earned the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation; and by providing him a corrected separation document that includes these awards.

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

BOARD VOTE:

__JLP __ _ _CJP __ __KWL GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION




                  __Jennifer L. Prater__
                  CHAIRPERSON

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001062197
SUFFIX
RECON	YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED	2002/01/17
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION	GRANT (PARTIAL)
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1.	107.0015
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.