PROCEEDINGS


         IN THE CASE OF:
        

         BOARD DATE: 1 October 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002075910


         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
Ms. Margaret K. Patterson		Member
Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		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 award of the Purple Heart (PH).

3. The applicant states, in effect, that he suffered an injury that was caused by an enemy mine while in the field in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN). He claims that he received numerous broken vertebrae in his back, a broken elbow, and a bleeding kidney as a result of this incident. He was treated at the 249^th General Hospital, RVN, and was told at the time that he was being recommended for the PH. He further states that he never received the PH, and he feels that he is entitled to the award. In support of his application, he submits a copy of his separation document (DD Form 214), a Clinical Record Narrative Summary (Standard Form 88), dated 1 September 1968, and a Clinical Record Cover Sheet (DA Form 8-275-2), dated 10 September 1968.

4. The applicant’s military records show that he was inducted into the Army for two years on 4 March 1968. He was trained in, awarded, and served in military occupational specialty 11D (Armor Intelligence Specialist). He continuously served on active duty until being honorably separated on 30 March 1970.

5. The applicant’s Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows that he served in the RVN from 24 July 1968 to 18 September 1968, and that he was assigned to C Troop, 1^st Squadron, 1^st Cavalry Regiment, where he performed duties in MOS 11D. Block 40 (Wounds) contains an entry that indicates that the applicant received a compression fracture of his back and a fractured left elbow on 20 August 1968, which would indicate that he was wounded in action while serving in the RVN. Block 41 (Awards and Decorations) shows that during his tenure on active duty he earned the following awards: National Defense Service Medal; Vietnam Service Medal; and the RVN Campaign Medal with 60 Device.

6. The applicant’s Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) contains no derogatory information and contains no indication that he was ever disqualified for the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM) by any of the unit commanders for which he served. Finally, the applicant’s name does not appear on the Department of the Army (DA) Vietnam Casualty Roster.

7. The DA Form 8-275-2 and the Standard Form 88 submitted by the applicant both confirm that he received medical treatment for injuries he received as a result of hostile forces mine fragments on 28 August 1968.

8. Army Regulation 600-8-22 prescribes the policy for the Army awards program. Paragraph 2-8 contains the policy for awarding the PH, and it states, in pertinent part, that the PH 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.
9. Paragraph 2-8b(3) states that when contemplating an award of the PH, the key issue that commanders must take into consideration is the degree to which the enemy caused the injury. The fact that the proposed recipient was participating in direct or indirect combat operations is a necessary prerequisite, but is not sole justification for award. Paragraph 2-8b(4) provides examples of enemy-related injuries which clearly justify award of the PH and it includes the example of an injury caused by an enemy placed mine or trap.

10. Paragraph 2-13 of the awards regulation contains guidance on awarding the Vietnam Service Medal and it states, in pertinent part, that a bronze service star is authorized with this award for each campaign participated in while serving in the RVN. Table B-1 lists all campaigns, service requirements, and inscriptions for streamers. It confirms that the applicant participated in one campaign during his tenure in the RVN.

11. Chapter 4 contains guidance on the award of the AGCM and it states, in pertinent part, that this award is authorized to individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency and fidelity during a qualifying period of active duty enlisted service. For the first award only, a period of 1 or more years is a qualifying period if it is awarded at the termination of a period of Federal military service. Although there is no automatic entitlement to this award, disqualification must be justified. Current practice requires that unit commanders provide written notice of non-favorable consideration and allow individuals the opportunity to respond/rebut the reason for denial of the award

12. 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. The Board notes the applicant’s contention that he should be awarded the PH and finds this claim has merit. By regulation, in order to award the PH an individual must have sustained a wound or injury in action and the wound or injury must have been treated by military medical personnel. Further, when contemplating an award of the PH, the key issue that commanders must take into consideration is the degree to which the enemy caused the injury. One example provided that justifies award of the PH is an injury caused by an enemy placed mine or trap.

---

2. The evidence of record confirms that on 28 August 1968, while serving as a private first class in the RVN, the applicant received injuries that were caused by a blast from an enemy placed mine, and that he was treated for these injuries by military medical personnel. Therefore, the Board concludes the regulatory burden of proof necessary to support award of the PH has been met in this case, and it would be appropriate to award the applicant he PH at this time.

3. Absent any derogatory information on file or a specific disqualifying action from any of his active duty unit commanders, the Board also concludes that the applicant served a qualifying period of honorable service that entitles him to the first award of the AGCM. Further, he is entitled to the 1 bronze service star with his Vietnam Service Medal and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation based on his RVN service. Thus, the Board finds that it would also be appropriate to add these awards to his records at this time.

4. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case for the individual concerned be corrected by awarding him the Purple Heart, for being wounded in action on 28 August 1968, while serving as a private first class in the RVN, and the Army Good Conduct Medal for his honorable period of active duty service from 4 March 1968 through 30 March 1970; by showing he is entitled to the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, and
1 bronze service star with his Vietnam Service Medal; and providing him a corrected separation document that reflects these awards.

BOARD VOTE:

__RVO__ __MKP _ __AAO __ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION




                  __Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr. _
                  CHAIRPERSON

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002075910
SUFFIX
RECON	YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED	2002/10/01
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.	107.0015
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.