RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        3 February 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040004098


      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. John L. Smith                 |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Melvin Meyer                  |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Linda Barker                  |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Larry Olson                   |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests in effect, that his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of
the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) be corrected to show the
military occupational specialty for "Crew Chief/ Door-gunner."

2.  The applicant also request award of the Air Medal with Numerals 2
through 5, the Army Commendation Medal with First Oak Leaf Cluster, and the
Good Conduct Medal.

3.  The applicant states that he was trained as a UH-1 Helicopter Repairman
and that he served as a "Crew Chief/Door-gunner" with two units while he
was serving in Vietnam.

4.  The applicant argues in effect, that while he was at the
Separation/Transfer Point in Fort Lewis, Washington, he advised the
separations officer of these errors and omissions.

5.  The applicant concludes that the separation officer advised him that
the requested changes would be made and that a copy of those corrections
would be forwarded to him.

6.  The applicant provides a copy of his DA Form 214 with his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error, which
occurred on 17 June 1971, the date of his separation from active duty.  The
application submitted in this case is dated 18 May 2004.

2.  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 allows the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file
within the 3-year statute of limitation if the ABCMR determines that it
would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will
conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in
the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  The applicant's service personnel records show that he enlisted on
15 November 1968.  He completed basic training and advanced individual
training and was awarded MOS 67N (UH-1 Helicopter Repairer).  Records show
that he was honorably separated from active duty on 17 June 1971, after
serving 2 years, 7 months, and 3 days of service.

4.  Item 23 (Specialty Number & Title) of the applicant's DD Form 214 shows
his MOS as 67M20 (OH11-13/OH-23 Helicopter Repairman).

5.  Headquarters, US Army Transportation School Fort Eustis (Virginia)
Special Orders Number 64, dated 2 April 1969, show that the applicant was
awarded the MOS 67N20 (UH-1 Helicopter Repairer).

6.  Headquarters, 4th Infantry Division, APO San Francisco, Special Orders
Number 229, dated 17 August 1970, show that the applicant was awarded MOS
67M20 (OH11-13/OH-23 Helicopter Repairman) effective 1 August 1970, based
on his promotion to the grade of specialist five/pay grade E-5.

7.  Item 32 (Signature of Person Being Transferred or Discharged) contains
the signature of the applicant which shows that he authenticated the
accuracy of his DD Form 214.

8.  There is no statement or evidence in the available personnel records
that shows the Officer-In-Charge (OIC) of the Separation /Transfer Point at
Fort Lewis, Washington, indicated an error existed with the applicant's
Primary Military Occupational Specialty (PMOS) and that corrections would
be made and forwarded to his Home of Record.

9.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Personnel Separations), in effect at the time,
governs the requirements for proper annotation of the DD Form 214.  In
pertinent part, it states that Item 23a will specify the PMOS code, number,
title, and date of award.

10.  Item 24 (Decorations Medals, Badges, Commendations Citations, and
Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant's DD Form 214 does
not show award of the Air Medal.

11. Headquarters, US Army 1st Aviation Brigade, APO San Francisco, General
Orders Number 5184, dated 29 June 1971, show that the applicant received
the first award of the Air Medal for the period 31 May 1970 to 3 April
1971.

12.  Headquarters, US Army 1st Aviation Brigade, APO San Francisco, General
Orders Number 7196, dated 14 November 1971, show that the applicant
received the second through fifth award of the Air Medal for his service
during the period 12 April 1971 to 2 June 1971.
13.  Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides that Arabic numerals
are used instead of oaf leaf clusters for the second and succeeding awards
of the Air Medal.  The numeral 2 denotes the second award of the Air Medal.

14.  Item 24 of the applicant's DD Form 214 does not show that he received
a second Army Commendation Medal, correctly known as the Army Commendation
Medal (First Oak Leaf Cluster).

15.  There are no orders or other evidence that the applicant was
authorized this award.  In the absence of authority for this award, the
applicant may request award of the Army Commendation Medal under the
provisions of Section 1130 of Title 10, United States Code.  The applicant
has been notified by separate correspondence of the procedures for applying
for this award under Section 1130 and, as a result, it will not be
discussed further in this Records of Proceedings.

16.  Item 24 of the applicant's DD Form 214 does not show that he was
awarded the Good Conduct Medal.

17.  There also is no evidence the applicant was disqualified by his chain
of command from receiving the Good Conduct Medal.  His records do not
contain any adverse information, and he received conduct and efficiency
ratings of "excellent" throughout his service.

18.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides that the 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.  The regulation states that, after 27 August 1940, three years of
qualifying service was required for award of the Good Conduct Medal, but
during the World War II era, the first award could be made based on one
year of qualifying service provided that service occurred between 7
December 1941 to 2 March 1946.  After 27 June 1950 to the present time, the
current standard for award of the Good Conduct Medal is 3 years of
qualifying service, but as little as one year is required for the first
award in those cases when the period of service ends with the termination
of Federal military service.  Although there is no automatic entitlement to
the Good Conduct Medal, disqualification must be justified.

19.  Review of the applicant's service personnel records indicate he is
also entitled to additional awards which are not shown on his DD Form 214.

20.  The applicant's records show that he was awarded the Vietnam Service
Medal.  However, his DD Form 214 does not show any bronze service stars
indicating campaign credit.  His records indicate that he participated in
the Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase VII campaign and the Department of the
Army Sanctuary Counteroffensive campaign.

21.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign
Participation Credit Register) lists the unit awards received by units
serving in Vietnam.  This document shows that, at the time of the
applicant's assignment to Company E, 704th Maintenance Battalion, 4th
Infantry Division, the unit was cited for award of the Republic of Vietnam
Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation based on Headquarters Department of
the Army General Orders Number 52, dated 1971.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that the MOS currently listed on his DD Form 214
is incorrect.

2.  Special Orders show that he was awarded the MOS 67M20 (OH11-13/OH-23
Helicopter Repairman) based on promotion to the grade of specialist
five/pay grade E-5.

3.  Although the applicant states that the OIC at the Separation/Transfer
Point at Fort Lewis, Washington would make correction to his MOS, there is
no evidence in the available records to substantiate this statement.
Additionally, the applicant has failed to provide evidence that he was
awarded this PMOS or that he served in the duty positions of "Crew Chief or
Door-gunner."  Based on the foregoing, there is insufficient evidence to
warrant correction of his PMOS.

4.  The applicant contends that he is entitled to four additional awards of
the Air Medal.

5.  General Orders show that the applicant was awarded the Air Medal
(second through fifth) award which are not shown on his DD Form 214.
Therefore, his records should be corrected to show that he was awarded the
Air Medal with Numeral 5.

6.  The applicant is entitled to the first award of the Good Conduct Medal
for the period 15 November 1968 through 17 June 1971 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 that the applicant
participated in two campaigns during his assignment in Vietnam which are
not correctly shown by award of bronze service stars for wear on his
Vietnam Service Medal.  Therefore, in accordance with the governing
regulation, the applicant is entitled to two bronze service stars to be
affixed to his Vietnam Service Medal and correction of his DD Form 214 to
show the award of the bronze service stars

8.  General Orders show the applicant is entitled to award of the Republic
of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation.  Therefore, he is
entitled to correction of his records to show this foreign unit award.

9.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 17 June 1971; therefore, the time for
the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice
expired on 16 June 1974.  Although the applicant did not file within the
ABCMR's statute of limitations, the Board determined that it was in the
interest of justice to waive failure to timely file in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

_MM_____  __LJO__  LB_____  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 to show:

      a.  award of the Air Medal with Numeral "5.";


      b.  award of the Good Conduct Medal for the period 15 November 1968
through 17 June 1971;
      c.  award of two bronze service stars to be affixed to his Vietnam
Service Medal; and

      d. award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit
Citation.


2.  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
correction of his MOS on his DD Form 214.



                                           _Melvin H. Meyer____
                                            CHAIRPERSON


INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR                                      |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005/02/03                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |                                        |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |                                        |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]