PROCEEDINGS


         IN THE CASE OF:


         BOARD DATE: 20 MARCH 2003
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002076889


         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. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. Luther L. Santiful		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 award of the Purple Heart. He states he was wounded in Vietnam and never received the Purple Heart. He also stated, in a telephone conversation with a member of the Board's staff, that he was wounded on 28 February 1969, during the action for which he was awarded the Army Commendation Medal with "V" device. In support of his request he submits copies of Department of Veterans Affairs medical documents, completed in 1981, indicating that he underwent an operation to remove a "subcutaneous foreign object" from his thigh. The 1981 medical document indicates the applicant reported being "injured in Vietnam in 1969 with shrapnel." One of the medical documents notes that the "metallic foreign body" removed from the applicant's thigh was "consistent with shrapnel."

3. Records available to the Board indicate the applicant entered active duty on 29 January 1968. While undergoing advanced individual training he qualified as a sharpshooter with the machinegun (M-60) and as a marksman with the automatic rifle (M-16). Although he was awarded the associated badges and component bars, that information was omitted from his separation document.

4. In July 1968 the applicant was assigned to Vietnam as an infantryman with the 3^rd Squadron, 5^th Cavalry. On 30 April 1969 the applicant, along with 13 other soldiers, was awarded an Army Commendation Medal with "V" device as a result of their heroic actions on 28 February 1969. The order announcing the award does not contain a narrative citation of the actions, which result in the award recommendation. While the applicant's separation document does note the award of the Army Commendation Medal, it fails to indicate the award was for heroism.

5. The applicant remained in Vietnam until August 1969 when he returned to the United States for separation processing. He was released from active duty with an honorable characterization of service on 1 September 1969. He was serving in pay grade E-5 at the time of his separation.

6. In October 1969, after the applicant's separation, he was awarded the Bronze Star Medal for his meritorious service while in Vietnam.

7. Although the applicant's service medical records were not available to the Board, his separation physical examination, which was completed on
1 September 1969 as part of his separation processing, makes no mention of any wounds received as a result of hostile actions while in Vietnam. Additionally, item 40 (wounds) on his Department of the Army Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) is blank and the applicant's name is not among a list of individuals reported as casualties during the Vietnam War.

8. A review of the historical files of the 3^rd Squadron, 5^th Cavalry, maintained at the National Archives in College Park, Maryland, also failed to confirm that the applicant was entitled to an award of the Purple Heart.

9. Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that the Purple Heart is awarded for wounds 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 by a medical officer, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.

10. Army Regulation 600-8-22 also provides that the Army Good Conduct Medal is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency and fidelity during a qualifying period of active duty enlisted service. This period is 3 years except in those cases when the period for the first award ends with the termination of a period of Federal military service. Although there is no automatic entitlement to the Army Good Conduct Medal, disqualification must be justified. Current practice requires that the commander provide written notice of nonfavorable consideration and permits the individual to respond. There is no evidence in the applicant's official military personnel file that his commander ever disqualified him for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal and his conduct and efficiency ratings throughout his military service were excellent.

11. A review of Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 indicates that the applicant's unit (3^rd Squadron, 5^th Cavalry) was awarded a Presidential Unit Citation, a Valorous Unit Award, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm, and participated in four designated campaigns (Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase V and VI, TET 69 Counteroffensive, Vietnam Summer-Fall 1969) while he was a member of the organization. The unit awards were omitted from his separation document and his four bronze service stars, denoting participation in the four campaigns, was omitted from his Vietnam Service Medal.

CONCLUSIONS:

1. Although the applicant may have had a foreign metallic object removed from his thigh in 1981 there is insufficient evidence which confirms that the object was the result of hostile actions while the applicant was in Vietnam. There is no evidence in existing service medical documents, personnel service records, or casualty or unit files, which confirms the applicant was wounded as a result of hostile action while in Vietnam. As such, the Board concludes there is insufficient evidence on which to base an award of the Purple Heart.





2. The Board does note, however, that the applicant completed a qualifying period of service for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal on 1 September 1969. There is no evidence his commander ever disqualified him from receiving the award and no evidence of any misconduct which would justify denying him the award. In view of the foregoing, the Board concludes that the applicant met the basic qualifications for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal and it would be appropriate and in the interest of equity to award him that decoration for the period 28 January 1968 through 1 September 1969.

3. The Board also notes that the "V" device was omitted from the Army Commendation Medal recorded on the applicant's separation document and that his award of the Bronze Star Medal was also omitted.

4. The evidence confirms that the applicant qualified as a sharpshooter with the machinegun and as a marksman with the automatic rifle and that he was awarded the associated badges and component bars. His records should be corrected accordingly.

5. The evidence also confirms that the applicant is entitled to a Presidential Unit Citation, a Valorous Unit Award, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm, and four bronze service stars on his Vietnam Service Medal. His records should be corrected accordingly.

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:

a. by awarding the individual concerned the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 28 January 1968 through 1 September 1969;

b. by showing that he qualified as a sharpshooter with the machinegun and as a marksman with the automatic rifle and that he was awarded the associated badges and component bars;

c. by showing his Army Commendation Medal was awarded for heroism by adding the "V" device;

d. by showing that he was awarded the Bronze Star Medal; and

e. by showing that he is entitled to a Presidential Unit Citation, a Valorous Unit Award, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm, and four bronze service stars on his Vietnam Service Medal.

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

BOARD VOTE:

__LLS __ __CJP___ ___KWL_ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION




                  ____Luther L. Santiful______
                  CHAIRPERSON

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002076889
SUFFIX
RECON	YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED	20030320
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.