PROCEEDINGS


         IN THE CASE OF:


         BOARD DATE: 10 APRIL 2003
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002077640


         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. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson
Mr. Lester Echols		Member
Ms. Marla J. N. Troup		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 that his records be corrected to reflect award of the Purple Heart. The applicant states that he was never awarded the Purple Heart for a wound he received while in Vietnam. He states that at the time he did not feel that he deserved the award because the wound resulted from a friendly air strike and it was not serious enough for him to leave the field. He notes that this is an injustice he created himself. In support of his request he submits statements from two fellow soldiers who witnessed his wound and extracts from his Department of Veterans Affairs records

3. Records available to the Board indicate the applicant entered active duty on 13 November 1967. While undergoing training he qualified as a marksman with the automatic rifle (M-16) and was awarded the associated badge and component bar. That information, however, was omitted from his separation document.

4. In May 1968 the applicant was assigned to Vietnam as an infantryman with the 7^th Cavalry where he was awarded an Air Medal. The applicant was subsequently assigned to the 58^th Infantry.

5. In July 1969 the applicant returned to the United States and on 12 November 1969 he was released from active duty with an honorable characterization of service in pay grade E-5. Neither his Department of Defense Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer of Discharge), nor his Department of the Army Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record), reflect entitlement to the Purple Heart and item 40 (wounds) on his Department of the Army Form 20 is blank. The applicant authenticated the information on his qualification record on 11 September 1969 and his separation document on the date of his separation.

6. Subsequent to his separation, in 1996, the applicant submitted an application for correction of his military records requesting award of the Combat Infantryman Badge. He made no mention of his belief that he may also have been entitled to a Purple Heart. His request was administratively adjudicated by officials from the Army Review Boards Agency Support Division in St. Louis who issued a Department of Defense Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) adding the Combat Infantryman Badge to his record.

7. The statements submitted in support of the applicant’s petition were authored in 2001. One individual said he saw the applicant’s bandaged leg and that he was limping after an ambush by enemy forces in which “Cobra gunships had to be called in to help cover our advance.” The second individual also stated that he saw the applicant limping “later that night” and that “either the medic forgot or [the applicant] was too modest to put himself in” for the Purple Heart. The 1996 extracts from the applicant’s Department of Veterans Affairs records indicates that an examining physician noted a well healed scar on the applicant’s leg and that the applicant had related that he sustained a shrapnel wound to his right leg as a result of friendly fire and that he took the shrapnel out himself. He indicated that there was no medical attention, hospitalization, or surgery.

8. 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. There were no medical records available to the Board beyond the 1996 extract from his Department of Veterans Affairs records. The applicant’s name was not among of list of individuals reported as casualties during the Vietnam War and a search of the historical files of the 7^th Cavalry maintained at the National Achieves failed to produce any evidence that the applicant was ever wounded while in Vietnam.

9. Included as part of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act for fiscal year 1994 was an amendment to the rules governing award of the Purple Heart. While the original rules established that the Purple Heart would be awarded to individuals killed or wounded as a result of hostile action the amendment enabled the Secretaries of each department to award the Purple Heart to members of the armed forces who were killed or wounded in action by weapon fire, while directly engaged in armed conflict, other than as the result of an act of an enemy of the United States. This ruling, in effect, granted the Service Secretaries the authority to award the Purple Heart to individuals directly engaged in armed conflict who were killed or wounded as a result of "friendly fire."

10. A review of Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 indicates that the applicant is entitled to a Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm and a Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation as a result of his service with the 7^th Cavalry in Vietnam.

11. 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. His conduct and efficiency ratings, with the exception of good ratings while undergoing advanced individual training, were excellent and his records contain no evidence of any disciplinary actions or incidents of misconduct.

CONCLUSIONS:

1. The authority to award a Purple Heart as the result of friendly fire was not established until 1994. However, notwithstanding that information, the Board notes that neither individual who submitted a statement supporting the applicant’s petition for award of the Purple Heart actually witnessed the applicant’s injury. The Board also notes that the applicant himself admitted that his wound did not require medical treatment and the 1996 extract from his Department of Veterans Affairs file is not sufficient to confirm that the applicant was in fact wounded while in Vietnam. In view of the foregoing, the Board concludes there is insufficient evidence on which to base an award of the Purple Heart.

2. The applicant is, however, entitled to a Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm, and a Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation, which should be added to his separation document.

3. The Board also notes that the applicant qualified as a marksman with the automatic rifle (M-16) and was awarded the associated badge and component bar. His records should be corrected accordingly.

4. The applicant completed a qualifying period of service for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal on 12 November 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 13 November 1967 through 12 November 1969.

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:

a. by showing that the individual concerned qualified as a marksman with the automatic rifle (M-16) and was awarded the associated badge and component bar;

b. by showing that he is entitled to a Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm and a Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation; and
c. by awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period
13 November 1967 through 12 November 1969.

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

BOARD VOTE:

__FNE __ LE___ __MJNT_ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION




                  ____Fred N. Eichorn_____
                  CHAIRPERSON

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002077640
SUFFIX
RECON	YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED	20030410
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.