RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        6 December 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050001807


      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. G. E. Vandenberg              |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Bernard P. Ingold             |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Donald W. Steedfott           |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Edward E. Montgomery          |     |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 records be corrected to show award of
the Presidential Unit Citation and to receive a 101st Airborne Division's
"Gold Eagle Coin".

2.  The applicant states that he received the Presidential Unit Citation
Ribbon upon return from Vietnam but that it was not recorded on his DD Form
214 (Report of Transfer or Discharge). He states he has documentation
indicating he was awarded the "Gold Eagle Coin" but has never received the
actual coin.

3.  The applicant provides no supporting documentation.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on 8 January 1971, the date of his release from active duty.  The
application submitted in this case is dated 21 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.  Award and issuance of a unit "coin" is at the discretion of the
individual unit.  These items are not official Department of the Army items
over which the ABCMR has jurisdiction.  Therefore, the applicant should
contact the 101st Airborne Division directly on this issue and it will not
be further addressed.

4.  The records show the applicant entered active duty on 11 March 1969.
He completed training and was awarded the military occupational specialty
(MOS) 11B (Light Weapons Infantry).

5.  A DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) indicates at:

      a.  Block 31 (Foreign Service), service in Vietnam from 11 August
1969 through 10 August 1970;

      b.  Block 33 (Appointments), he was advanced to specialist four (E-4)
on 26 November 1969;

      c.  Block 38 (Assignments), he served in Vietnam with A Company, 2nd
Battalion, 502nd Infantry Regiment;

      d.  Block 38 also records his conduct and efficiency ratings
exclusively as excellent;

      e.  Block 39 (Campaigns), he served during two campaign periods; and

      f.  Block 41 (Awards), lists his awards as the Bronze Star Medal, the
Army Commendation Medal, the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam
Service Medal, the Combat Infantryman Badge, the Republic of Vietnam
Campaign Medal with "1960" Device, the Expert Badge with Rifle Bar (for the
M-16 rifle), and the Marksman Badge with Rifle Bar (for the M-14 rifle).

6.  The applicant was honorably released from active duty on 8 January 1971
in the rank of specialist four (E-4).  He had 1 year, 9 months, and 28 days
of creditable service.

7.  His DD Form 214 lists his awards as the Bronze Star Medal, the Army
Commendation Medal, the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service
Medal, the Republic of Vietnam Service Medal with "1960" Device, the Combat
Infantryman's Badge, the Expert Badge with Rifle Bar, and two Overseas
Service Bars.

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.  This document shows that while the applicant was
assigned to A Company, 2nd Battalion, 502nd Infantry Regiment, it was not
cited for award of the Presidential Unit Citation but was cited for award
of the Vietnam Cross of Gallantry with Palm Unit Citation.

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 also authorizes a bronze service star, based
on qualifying service, for each designated campaign listed in Appendix B of
the regulation and states that authorized bronze service stars will be worn
on the appropriate campaign or service medal.  A silver service star is
authorized in lieu of five bronze service stars.  The regulation also lists
the designated campaign periods for which a bronze service star is
authorized for wear on the Vietnam Service Medal.  Based on the applicant's
dates of service in Vietnam, Appendix B indicates he participated during
the following four campaign periods: Vietnam Summer–Fall 1969, 9 June 1969
– 31 October 1969; the Vietnam Winter–Spring 1970, 1 November 1969 – 30
April 1970; the DA Sanctuary Counteroffensive, 1 May 1970 – 30 June 1970;
and the Counteroffensive Phase VII, 1 July 1970 – 30 June 1971.

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22, chapter 4, states 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.  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.  A record of punishment is not automatically
disqualifying.  However, at that time, a single efficiency rating of less
than excellent was disqualifying.  Although there is no automatic
entitlement to the 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.  At that
time, a disqualification was normally noted on the DA Form 20.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The record contains no documentation substantiating that the applicant
was awarded Presidential Unit Citation or served during a period for which
his unit was awarded the Presidential Unit Citation.

2.  The applicant distinguished himself by his conduct, efficiency and
fidelity as evidenced by his combat service, his conduct and efficiency
ratings, his personal decorations, and his promotion to E-4.  The record
contains no indication of any disqualifying incidents or recommendations.
It is appropriate to award the applicant the Good Conduct Medal for his
period of service from 11 March 1969 through 8 January 1971.

3.  In addition to the awards listed on his DD Form 214, the applicant is
authorized the Republic of Vietnam Cross of Gallantry with Palm Unit
Citation, the Marksman Badge with Rifle Bar, and to wear four bronze
service stars on the Vietnam Service Medal.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

_BPI____  __EEM__  __DWS__  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 awarding him the Good
Conduct Medal.

2.  The Board further determined that, in addition to the awards listed on
his DD Form 214, the applicant is authorized the Republic of Vietnam Cross
of Gallantry with Palm Unit Citation, the Marksman Badge with Rifle Bar,
and to wear four bronze service stars on the Vietnam Service Medal.

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
award of the Presidential Unit Citation.




                                  _     _Bernard P. Ingold__________
                                            CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050001807                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20051206                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |Partial Grant                           |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |107                                     |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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