PROCEEDINGS


         IN THE CASE OF:
        

         BOARD DATE: 20 February 2003
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002076514


         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. Joann H. Langston		Chairperson
Mr. Lester Echols		Member
Mr. Allen L. Raub		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 earned the Purple Heart (PH), Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM), Air Medal (AM), Combat Medical Badge (CMB), and Aircraft Crew Member Badge.

3. The applicant states, in effect, that as medic assigned to the 57^th Medical Detachment in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN), he was injured during a helicopter accident on 17 February 1971, and that he was treated for his injury at the dispensary at Binh Thuy. He also states that his separation document (DD Form 214) does not include the PH, ARCOM, AM, CMB, and the Aviation Wings in the list of authorized awards. In support of his application, he submits a third party statement, an aeromedical clearance notice, dated 17 February 1971, and a DD Form 214.

4. The applicant’s military records show that he entered the Army on
7 October 1969, and that he was trained and served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 91B (Medic). It also confirms that he served in the RVN from
10 March 1970 to 10 May 1971, and that during this period he participated in three campaigns. On 25 February 1971, he was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD), in the rank of specialist four/E-4, by reason of early separation of overseas returnee.

5. The applicant’s Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) contains no orders or other documents that verify that the applicant was wounded or injured in action, or that he was awarded the PH, AM, CMB, or Aviation Wings as authorized awards. In addition, the MPRJ 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 active duty unit commanders for which he served.

6. The applicant’s MPRJ did contain a copy of General Orders Number 275, dated 25 January 1971, issued by Headquarters, United States Army Vietnam, which awarded the applicant the ARCOM, for meritorious service in support of military operations against a hostile force while serving in the RVN from March 1970 to March 1971.

7. In the processing of this case, a review of the Department of the Army (DA) Vietnam Casualty Roster was conducted and the applicant’s name does not appear on this roster. Further, the historical record of the applicant’s unit in the RVN, the 57^th Medical Detachment (Helicopter Ambulance), 68^th Medical Group, that are maintained at the National Archives were reviewed by a member of the Board staff.

---

8. The review of the unit historical records at the National Archives did produce a copy of an Aircraft Accident Crash Facts Message Report and the Summary Of Technical Report Of U.S. Army Aircraft Accident (DA 2397), which confirms the applicant’s involvement in a helicopter accident. However, the Trauma Information Section of this report failed to show the applicant was injured during this incident, and in fact contains an entry that indicates the applicant suffered no trauma as a result of the accident. The unit historical records search also produced no documentation showing that the applicant was ever wounded or injured in action or awarded the PH.

9. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes the policy and procedures for the Army’s awards program. 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 required medical treatment; and that this medical treatment was made a matter of official record.

10. 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.

11. Paragraph 3-15 of the awards regulation contains guidance on awarding the Air Medal (AM). It states, in pertinent, that the AM is awarded in time of war for heroism and for meritorious achievement or service while participating in aerial flight. This award is primarily intended for personnel on flying status, but may also be awarded to those personnel whose combat duties require them to fly; for example, personnel in the attack elements of units involved in air-land assaults against an armed enemy. In the RVN, there was specific flight category and number of missions criteria that was required to be met in order to support the award of the AM.

12. Chapter 4 contains guidance on awarding the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM) and 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. A qualifying period is defined as a 3 year period of continuous enlisted active Federal military service served after
27 August 1940. Although there is no automatic entitlement to the AGCM, disqualification must be justified

---

13. Paragraph 8-7 contains the criteria for awarding the CMB during the Vietnam conflict. These provisions permitted award of the CMB to soldiers assigned to a Vietnamese unit engaged in actual ground combat or as a member of U.S. Army infantry unit of brigade or smaller size, including Special Forces Detachments serving with the Republic of Vietnam units engaged in actual ground combat. The special provisions required that the soldier must have been personally present and under hostile fire while assigned as specified.

14. Paragraph 8-25 contains the criteria for awarding the Aircraft Crew Member Badge. It states, in pertinent part, that the Aircraft Crew Member Badge may be permanently awarded for successful completion of formal advanced individual training in career management field 67 (Aircraft Maintenance).

15. Table B-1 of Army Regulation 600-8-22 lists all campaigns, service requirements, and inscriptions for streamers. This document confirms the during the applicant’s assignment tenure in the RVN, campaign participation credit was awarded for the following three campaigns: Vietnam Winter-Spring1970;
DA Sanctuary Counteroffensive; and Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase VII.

16. Department of the Army General Order Number 8, issued in 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 applicant’s claim of entitlement to the PH and the third party hearsay statement, after carefully examining the evidence of record and the independent evidence submitted by the applicant, the Board finds an insufficient evidentiary basis to support this contention.

2. The evidence of record verifies that the applicant was involved in an aircraft accident in the RVN. However, the accident report shows that he suffered no trauma as a result of this accident. Further, there is no evidence in the applicant’s record or in the unit historical files that show he was ever wounded or injured in action during his tenure in the RVN. Further, in the opinion of the Board, given the accident was documented at the time, had there been a sufficient basis for awarding the PH the command would have awarded it at the time.

---

3. By regulation, in order to receive the CMB a member must have been assigned or attached to a medical unit of company or smaller size that was organic to an infantry unit of brigade, regimental or smaller size which was engaged in active ground combat. The evidence of record confirms that he was assigned to a Helicopter Ambulance Medical Detachment and not a medical detachment organic to an infantry unit. Therefore, the Board concludes that there is insufficient evidence to support his claim of entitlement to the CMB.

4. By regulation, what the applicant refers to as Avaition Wings, which is properly designated the Aircraft Crew Member Badge may only be permanently awarded for successful completion of formal AIT in career management field
67 (Aircraft Maintenance). The record confirms that the applicant was trained and served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 91B (Medical Specialist), and therefore, he was not eligible to be permanently awarded the Aircraft Crew Member Badge.

5. There is no evidence of record available to the Board, and the applicant has failed to provide evidence to show he completed the requirements necessary to be awarded the Air Medal. While it is clear that he served with a Helicopter Ambulance Unit, there is no flight record to confirm that the applicant met the category and number of missions criteria necessary to qualify for the AM. Thus, the Board finds there is insufficient evidence to support this award.

6. During its review of this case, the Board did find that the applicant was awarded the ARCOM and that it was not properly recorded in the list of authorized awards contained in his separation document. Therefore, the Board finds it would be appropriate to correct his records to include the ARCOM in the list of authorized awards earned by the applicant.

7. Lacking any derogatory information on file in the applicant’s record or a specific disqualifying action from any of his active duty unit commanders, the Board concludes that he 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 three campaigns entitles him to 3 bronze service stars with his Vietnam Service Medal and to the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation. Therefore, the Board concludes that it would also be appropriate to add these awards to his record at this time.

8. 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 that the individual concerned was awarded the Army Commendation Medal; by awarding the applicant the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal for his honorable period of service from 7 October 1969 to 13 May 1971; by showing that based on his service in the RVN, he is entitled to Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation and to 3 bronze service stars for his Vietnam Service Medal; and by providing him a corrected separation document that includes these changes.

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

BOARD VOTE:

__JHL__ __ LE _ __ ALR __ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION



                  _ Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr._
                  CHAIRPERSON

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002076514
SUFFIX
RECON	YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED	2003/02/20
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION	Partial Relief
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1.	107.0015
2.	107.0018
3.	107.0020
4.	107.0113
5.	107.0118
6.