IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 23 April 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140016134 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests the following corrections to his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) with an effective date of 8 March 1968: * date of birth should be 25 September 1943 * no foreign service shown * no date of rank (DOR) for E-4 * add the Army Good Conduct Medal * add the Presidential Unit Citation (Army) while assigned to the 362nd Signal Company * add the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge for the M-16 * show the scroll on the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal 2. The applicant states when he compared his DD Form 214 with those of Soldiers he served with they were totally different. 3. The applicant provides: * DD Form 214 * statement, dated 28 August 2014, from Mr. RC CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing. 2. On 21 April 1966, he was inducted into the Army of the United States. His DOB shown on his DD Form 47 (Record of Induction) is 25 September 1943. 3. He served in the Republic of Vietnam from 19 March 1967 to 6 March 1968. He participated in three campaigns. He was assigned to: * 362nd Signal Company from 22 March 1967 - 24 September 1967 * 1st Infantry Division Detachment, Advance Team #3 (attached) from 25 September - 12 November 1967 * 337th Signal Company from 13 November 1967 - 3 March 1968 4. His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) provides the following information: * his DOB is entered as 25 September 1943 * he was promoted to specialist four (SP4)/pay grade E-4 on 20 July 1967 * he was awarded the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle (M-16) and Machinegun Bars 5. On 8 March 1968, he was released from active duty. His DD Form 214 contains the following entries: * item 6 (DOR) - 20 July 1967 * item 9 (DOB) - 9 September 1943 * item 22 (Foreign and/or Sea Service) - USARPAC (U.S. Army Pacific), 11 months and 18 days * Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) - "NDSM, VCM, VSM, and EXP (M-14)" 6. There is no evidence the applicant received the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal. There also is no evidence the applicant was disqualified by his chain of command from receiving the Army Good Conduct Medal. Records do not show any indiscipline or lost time. His records do not contain any adverse information and he received conduct and efficiency ratings of "excellent" throughout his service, with the exception of one “good” academic efficiency rating. 7. In a statement, dated 28 August 2014, Mr. RC describes his tour of duty with the applicant while assigned to Dalat, Danang, and Hue, Vietnam. 8. Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) lists the unit awards received by units serving in Vietnam. a. The 362nd Signal Company was awarded the Meritorious Unit Commendation (Army) for the period 15 August 1966 - 30 June 1968. There is no record of the unit being awarded the Presidential Unit Citation (Army). b. The 337th Signal Company was awarded the Meritorious Unit Commendation (Army) for the period 1 October 1967 - 1 October 1968. c. All units assigned in Vietnam from 8 February 1962 through 28 March 1973 were awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, based on Department of the Army General Order Number 8, dated 1974. 9. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning individual and unit military awards. a. The award of a bronze service star is authorized based on qualifying service for each campaign listed in Table B-1 (Campaigns, Service Requirements, and Inscriptions Prescribed for Streamers). Authorized service stars will be worn on the appropriate campaign medal, including the Vietnam Service Medal. b. The Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960) was awarded by the Government of Vietnam to all members of the Armed Forces of the United States for qualifying service in Vietnam during the period 1 March 1961 through 28 March 1973. Qualifying service included assignment in Vietnam for 6 months or more. 10. Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Awards), in effect at the time, stated the Army Good Conduct Medal was awarded for the first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June 1950 of less than 3 years but more than 1 year. a. The enlisted person must have had all "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings. Ratings of "Unknown" for portions of the period under consideration were not disqualifying. Academic ratings of “good” were not disqualifying. b. There must have been no convictions by a court-martial. c. However, there was no right or entitlement to the medal until the immediate commander made a positive recommendation for its award and until the awarding authority announced the award in general orders. 11. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), then in effect, established the standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214. In pertinent part, it directed that total active duty outside the continental limits of the United States for the period covered by the DD Form 214 and the last overseas theater in which service was performed be entered in Item 22c. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. His DA Form 20 shows he was promoted to SP4 on 20 July 1967. Therefore, the entry in item 6 of his DD Form 214 is correct. 2. His DOB is shown on his DD Form 47 and DA Form 20 as 25 September 1943. Therefore, his DOB on his DD Form 214 should be corrected to 25 September 1943. 3. Item 22c shows his last overseas theater as USARPAC and he served 11 months and 18 days in Vietnam. The last theater is to be shown in item 22c, not the last country. Therefore, the entries in item 22c of his DD Form 214 are correct. 4. The applicant's records do not show indiscipline or lost time, and he received conduct and efficiency ratings of "excellent" throughout his military service. Therefore, the preponderance of evidence shows the applicant is entitled to the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal based on completion of qualifying service from 21 April 1966 - 8 March 1968 ending with termination of a period of Federal military service. 5. Based on his service with the 362nd Signal Company he is authorized the Meritorious Unit Commendation (Army). Based on his service with the 337th Signal Company he is authorized a second award of the Meritorious Unit Commendation (Army). Therefore, his DD Form 214 should show the Meritorious Unit Commendation (Army) (2 awards). 6. Based on his service in the Republic of Vietnam he is authorized three bronze service stars to be worn on his Vietnam Service Medal, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, and the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960). 7. There is no evidence he was awarded the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge for the M-16. He was awarded the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle (M-16) and Machinegun Bars. 8. There is no evidence showing he served in a unit that received the Presidential Unit Citation (Army). BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ____X____ ___X_____ ____X____ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 1. The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal (First Award) for the period of service from 21 April 1966 to 8 March 1968. 2. The Board also recommends his DD Form 214 with an effective date of 8 March 1968 be corrected as follows: a. Deleting the entry in item 9 and entering 23 September 1943. b. Deleting the entries: "VCM and VSM" and adding the following awards: * Army Good Conduct Medal (First Award) * Meritorious Unit Commendation (Army) (two awards) * Vietnam Service Medal with three bronze service stars * Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation * Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960) 3. The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief. As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to his DOR, foreign service, and the Presidential Unit Citation (Army). ____________X___________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140016134 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140016134 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1