RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  3 November 2005
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050001638 


	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. Prevolia A. Harper

Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:


Mr. Thomas D. Howard Jr.

Chairperson

Mr. John Infante

Member

Ms. Carmen Duncan

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 correction of records to show award of the Vietnam Service Medal.

2.  The applicant states that item 26 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) should be corrected to show the Vietnam Service Medal. 

3.  The applicant provides: 

	a.  A copy of his DD Form 214 for the period 31 October 1964.

	b.  An AGPZ Form 358-3 (Headquarters, Department of the Army Extract).

	c.  An award certificate, dated 3 January 1964 which shows the applicant received the Army Commendation Medal while serving with the Military Assistance Advisory Group (MAAG) in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN).

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which occurred on 31 October 1964.  The application submitted in this case is dated 24 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 limitations 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 military records show that after serving in the enlisted ranks in the New Mexico National Guard, he was commissioned as a second lieutenant in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) on 7 March 1949.  Records show that although the applicant was commissioned as a second lieutenant in the USAR, 



he continued to serve in an active duty status in the enlisted ranks.  On 
31 October 1951 the applicant was discharged from the New Mexico National 
Guard Instructor Group and he entered active duty as a second lieutenant on 
1 November 1951.  

4. The applicant’s Officer Qualification Record (DA Form 66) shows that on 
11 May 1962, the applicant was promoted to major, which is the highest rank he attained while serving on active duty.  This document also shows the applicant was awarded the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (AFEM).

5.  The applicant’s DA Form 66 also shows he served in RVN during the period 14 January 1963 to 11 December 1963.  He served as a Personnel Officer with the U. S. Army Military Assistance Advisory Group (MAAG) in the RVN.

6.  The applicant provided a copy of an awards certificate which shows that he was awarded the Army Commendation Medal with 1st Oak Leaf Cluster.  The applicant’s record confirms that he received this award for outstanding service during the period 14 January 1963 to 9 December 1963 while assigned to the MAAG in Vietnam.

7.  The applicant provided a written statement requesting that he be awarded the Vietnam Service Medal in lieu of the AFEM.  

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, for award of the Vietnam Service Medal.  This medal is awarded to all members of the Armed Forces of the United States for qualifying service in Vietnam after 3 July 1965 through 28 March 1973.  Qualifying service included attachment to or assignment for 1 or more days with an organization participating in or directly supporting military operations.

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards), provides, in pertinent part, that the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal is authorized for participants in military operations within a specific geographic area during a specified time period.  Paragraph 2-13d specifically provides that individuals qualified for the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal for service in Vietnam from 1 July 1958 and 3 July 1965 (inclusive) shall remain qualified for that medal.  Upon request, a unit personnel officer may award the Vietnam Service Medal in lieu of the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, but the regulation requires that the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal be removed from the records of the individual.  No person will be entitled to both awards for Vietnam Service.

9.  Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) establishes the eligibility of individual members for campaign participation credit, assault landing credit, and unit citation badges awarded during the Vietnam Conflict.  It confirms that during his tenure of assignment in the RVN, the MAAG was awarded the Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation based on Department of the Army General Orders Number 8, dated 1974.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant served in Vietnam during the period 14 January 1963 to 11 December 1963.  He was subsequently awarded the AFEM for his service in Vietnam and now requests award of the Vietnam Service Medal.  By regulation, the applicant is not entitled to both the Vietnam Service Medal and the AFEM.  However, the regulation allows an individual to request removal of the AFEM and be awarded the Vietnam Service Medal.

2.  The applicant provided a written request to have the AFEM removed from his records and that he be awarded the Vietnam Service Medal instead.  Therefore, he has met the regulatory requirements to have the AFEM removed and replaced with the Vietnam Service Medal.

3.  The applicant is also entitled to the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation.  The applicant is authorized to wear this unit award on a permanent basis and it should also be added to his DD Form 214.

4.  The evidence of record shows the applicant received credit for participation in the Vietnam Advisory Campaign.  Therefore, he is entitled to one bronze service star to be worn on his Vietnam Service Medal.

5.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 31 October 1964.  Therefore, the time for him file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 30 October 1967.  However, based on the evidence of record, it would be in the interest of justice to excuse failure to timely file in this case.







BOARD VOTE:

__TDH __  ___JI ___  ___CD __  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief and to excuse failure to timely file.  As a result, the Board recommends that the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal shown on the applicant’s DD Form 214 for the period 31 October 1964 be removed and the Vietnam Service Medal with one bronze service star and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation be added.




__ Thomas D. Howard Jr.___
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20050001638
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
20051103
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE
YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR . . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.