PROCEEDINGS


         IN THE CASE OF:
        

         BOARD DATE: 19 November 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002076502


         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
Ms. Sherri V. Ward		Member
Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		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 and the Combat Medical Badge.

3. The applicant states, in effect, that he was a combat medic in an infantry platoon when he got hit by shrapnel in the thumb and leg. He contends that he was given a Purple Heart in the hospital in Japan. He also contends that he is
rated 30 percent disabled based on a service connected knee injury. In support of his application, he submits a copy of his DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or Discharge); a letter of explanation; a Western Union Telegram, dated 21 October 1969; a Department of Veterans Affairs letter, dated 1 September 1999; and orders for award of the Combat Medical Badge, dated 11 August 1969.

4. The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted on 7 June 1968 for a period of 3 years. He served as a medic in Vietnam from 23 June 1969 through 19 October 1969. On 18 February 1970, the applicant was placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) with a 30 percent disability rating. On 31 October 1971, the applicant was removed from the TDRL with entitlement to severance pay based on a 10 percent disability rating.

5. The applicant’s DD Form 214, which was authenticated in his own hand, does not show the Purple Heart or the Combat Medical Badge 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.

7. His 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.

8. The applicant’s name does not appear on the Vietnam Casualty Roster.

9. In support of his claim for award of the Purple Heart, the applicant provided a copy of a Western Union Telegram, dated 21 October 1969, which indicates that he was admitted to a hospital in Massachusetts from Vietnam on 20 October 1969 with a diagnosis of injury to left knee.

10. The applicant’s Medical Board report, dated 24 December 1969, states, in pertinent part, “This 18 year old, PFC/USA, with sixteen months active service, has had known osteochondritis [inflammation of both bone and cartilage] dissecans [osteochondritis resulting in the splitting of pieces of cartilage into the joint, particularly the knee joint or shoulder joint] since age 14 years. In mid September 1969, while in the Republic of Vietnam, he began having pain and giving way in his left knee. He was then air-evacuated to Japan where, on the 30th of September, he had an arthrotomy [surgical incision of a joint] of his left knee and osteochondral [pertaining to bone and cartilage] fragments were removed. Postoperatively, he did well and was air-evacuated to the Naval Hospital, Boston, Chelsea, Massachusetts, arriving here on 20 October 1969 with the above diagnoses”. This medical condition exited prior to entry in the Army.

11. Headquarters, 1st Infantry Brigade, 5th Infantry Division (Mech) Special Orders Number 223, dated 11 August 1969, show the applicant was awarded the first award of the Combat Medical Badge.

12. There is no evidence the applicant received the first award of the Good Conduct Medal. There also is no evidence the applicant was disqualified by his chain of command from receiving the Good Conduct Medal and his records do not contain any adverse information.

13. The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows the Vietnam Service Medal as an authorized award. His records show that he participated in one campaign during his assignment in Vietnam.

14. Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) shows the applicant is entitled to award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation based on Department of the Army General Orders Number 8, dated 1974. This award is not shown on his discharge document.

15. 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.

16. 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 noted the applicant’s contention that he was a combat medic in an infantry platoon when he got hit by shrapnel in the thumb and leg. However, there is no evidence of record to support this contention.

2. The Board noted the applicant’s contention that he was given a Purple Heart in the hospital in Japan. However, the applicant has provided no evidence to support this contention.

3. The Board also noted the applicant’s contention that he is 30 percent service connection for his left knee injury. However, medical evidence of record shows the applicant’s left knee condition existed prior to his entry in the Army.

4. 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 wounds 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.

5. The applicant received the first award of the Combat Medical Badge; therefore, he is entitled to correction of his military records to show this badge.

6. The applicant is entitled to the first award of the Good Conduct Medal for the period 7 June 1968 through 18 February 1970 based on completion of a period of qualifying service ending with the termination of a period of Federal military service. Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his records to show this award.

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

8. The applicant’s unit received the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation while he was assigned to it. Therefore, the applicant is entitled to correction of his military records to show this unit citation.

9. 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 showing that the individual concerned was awarded the first award of the Combat Medical Badge, the first award of the Good Conduct Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal with one bronze service star and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation.





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

BOARD VOTE:

JNS____ SVW____ MHM____ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION




                  __John N. Slone______
                  CHAIRPERSON

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002076502
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED	20021119
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
DATE OF DISCHARGE
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION	GRANT
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1.	107.0015
2.	107.0113
3.	107.0000
4.
5.
6.