RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:                                  27 OCTOBER 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:              AR20050000375


      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. Jessie B. Strickland          |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Melvin Meyer                  |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Allen Raub                    |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Linda Simmons                 |     |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 that his report of separation (DD Form 214) be
corrected to reflect his two awards of the Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM)
and that the 116 days of lost time be removed from his DD Form 214.

2.  The applicant states that he was awarded two awards of the ARCOM which
were omitted from his DD Form 214 at the time of his discharge.  He also
states that he was credited for 116 days of lost time for the period he was
on excess leave and he desires to have it removed because his employer
(United States Postal Service) is extending the length of time he has to
serve to retirement, because they are treating it as being absent without
leave (AWOL) time.

3.  The applicant provides copies of orders and citations for two ARCOMs
and one Bronze Star Medal, a copy of his record of assignments and a copy
of his DD Form 214.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on 10 May 1974.  The application submitted in this case is dated
27 December 2004 and was received on 6 January 2005.

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.  He enlisted in the Regular Army in Amarillo, Texas, on 28 April 1969,
for a period of 3 years and training as an engineer equipment repairman.

4.  He completed his basic combat training at Fort Bliss, Texas and his
advanced individual training (AIT) at Fort Belvoir, Virginia, before being
transferred to Vietnam on 6 March 1970.

5.  He was initially assigned to Company C, 65th Engineer Battalion, 25th
Infantry Division, and was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 17 May 1970.
 He was promoted to the pay grade of E-5 on 17 October 1970 and on
     11 December 1970, he was transferred to Headquarters and Headquarters
Company, 8th Engineer Battalion, 1st Cavalry Division.

6.  He departed Vietnam on 27 January 1971 and was transferred to Germany.
He was honorably discharged on 10 May 1971, for the purpose of immediate
reenlistment.  He reenlisted on 11 May 1971 for a period of 6 years, a
variable reenlistment bonus, and a transfer to another engineer company.

7.  On 17 January 1974, orders were published attaching the applicant to
Fort Hood, Texas, for the purpose of submitting a request for a hardship
discharge.  His request was approved and on 10 May 1974, he was honorably
discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 6-13,
for hardship.  He had served 3 years of active service during his current
enlistment and had 116 days of lost time.  His records do not specify the
nature of the lost time; however, he was given creditable service for that
period.  His DD Form 214 issued at the time of his discharge shows that he
was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal
with one bronze service star, the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal, and
the Bronze star Medal.

8.  A review of the applicant’s records shows that he received excellent
character and efficiency ratings throughout his service.  There is no
indication in his records to show that his commander took any action to
deny him award of the Good Conduct Medal (GCMDL).

9.  A review of the orders and citations provided by the applicant show
that he received an award of the ARCOM for the period of 1 July to 31
August 1970, while assigned to the 25th Infantry Division and an award of
the ARCOM for the period of December 1970 to January 1971, while assigned
to the 1st Cavalry Division.

10.  Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time, established the
criteria for award of the GCMDL.  It states, in pertinent part, that the
GCMDL was established by Executive Order 8809, 28 June 1941 and was amended
by Executive Order 9323, 1943 and by Executive Order 10444, 10 April 1953
and is awarded for exemplary behavior, efficiency, and fidelity in active
Federal military service.  The regulation also states, in pertinent part,
that for first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June
1950, a period of service of less than 3 years but more than 1 year
qualifies for award of the GCMDL.  In instances of disqualification as
determined by the unit commander, the commander will prepare a statement of
the rationale for his or her decision and the statement will be referred to
the individual Solder for comment before a final decision is made by the
commander.  The decision to disqualify an individual for award of the GCMDL
will be recorded and filed in the individual’s Official Military Personnel
File (OMPF).

11.  Department of Defense Financial Management Regulation (DOD 7000.14.R),
also known as the DOD Pay Manual, provides in Table 1-1-2, that when an
absence is authorized leave or excess leave, the period of absence is
creditable service.  An unauthorized absence of more than 1 day that is not
administratively excused as unavoidable is not creditable service.

12.  Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit
Register-Vietnam Era) was published to assist commanders and personnel
officers in determining or establishing the eligibility of individual
members for campaign participation credit, assault landing credit, and unit
citation badges awarded during the Vietnam Conflict.  Table 1 (Army Units
in Numerical Order) of the pamphlet indicates that the applicant’s unit was
subsequently awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm
(RVNGC w/Palm) Unit Citation, the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor
Medal – First Class (RVNCAHM-FC) Unit Citation during the period he was
assigned to the unit.

13.  Army Regulation 635-5 serves as the authority for the preparation of
the DD Form 214.  The regulation in effect at the time provided, in
pertinent part, that item 21. (Lost Time) of the DD form 214 will be
prepared to reflect lost time and time in an excess leave status for the
preceding 2 years only.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant clearly was awarded two awards of the ARCOM (ARCOM
w/1OLC) and therefore is entitled to have those awards added to his DD Form
214 at this time.

2.  Additionally, the evidence of record also shows that the applicant is
entitled to awards of the RVNGC w/Palm Unit Citation and the RVNCAHM-FC
Unit Citation.

3.  It appears that the applicant not receiving the GCMDL was likely the
result of an administrative error as opposed to it being the result of a
conscious disqualification by any of the unit commanders for which he
served.  Therefore, in the interest of justice, this error should be
corrected and the applicant should receive the GCMDL for the period of 28
April 1969 to 27 April 1972, at this time.

4.  Although the available records do not indicate the nature of the
applicant’s lost time of 116 days, he received creditable service for those
116 days and therefore it is reasonable to presume that it was excess leave
as he claims because he would not have received service credit if the time
lost was for being AWOL.

5.  While it is unfortunate that his employer chooses not to give him
credit for his 116 days of lost time, there is no evidence to show that the
entry is incorrect or in error.  Therefore, lacking such evidence, there
appears to be no basis to remove the lost time entry from his DD Form 214.


BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT RELIEF

___MM  _  ____AR _  ___LS  __  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 and to excuse failure to timely
file.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army
records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing that he was
awarded the ARCOM w/1OLC and by awarding him the GCMDL for the period of 28
April 1969 to 27 April 1972, the RVNGC w/Palm Unit Citation and the RVNCAHM-
FC 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
removal of lost time from his DD Form 214.




            ____Melvin Meyer__________________
                    CHAIRPERSON


                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050000375                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20051027                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |19740511                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200, CH 6, Para 6-13b, SPD 227   |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |ETS                                     |
|BOARD DECISION          |(PARTIAL GRANT)                         |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |AR 15-185                               |
|ISSUES                  |66/ARCOM                                |
|1.107.0020              |                                        |
|2.107.0056              |102/GCMDL                               |
|3.107.0094              |140/RVNGC                               |
|4.104.0095              |141/RVNCAHM                             |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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