RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        22 DECEMBER 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050004636


      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. Deborah L. Brantley           |     |Senior Analyst       |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Ted Kanamine                  |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Robert Duecaster              |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Jeanette McPherson            |     |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 separation document be corrected to
show that his Army Commendation Medal was awarded for heroism and that he
is entitled to the Presidential Unit Citation and Republic of Vietnam
Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm.

2.  The applicant states his Army Commendation Medal with "V" device was
omitted from his separation document.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of the orders confirming his award of the
Army Commendation Medal with "V" device.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
which occurred on 28 August 1967.  The application submitted in this case
is dated
16 March 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.  Records available to the Board indicate the applicant entered active
duty on 28 August 1964.  While undergoing basic combat training he was
punished under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)
for being absent from his place of duty.  His punishment included
restriction and extra duty.  In spite of the UCMJ action, the applicant
received an excellent conduct and efficiency rating at the conclusion of
his training and in January 1965 he was selected for attendance at an NCO
(noncommissioned officer) preparation course.

4.  In February 1966 the applicant was assigned to Troop E of the 17th
Cavalry in Vietnam.  In January 1967 he was awarded an Army Commendation
Medal with "V" device for his heroic actions on 13 January 1967.  Orders
issued by the 173rd Airborne Brigade confirmed the award.  There was no
indication the applicant was awarded any other Army Commendation Medals
beyond the one awarded for heroism.  Although the applicant's separation
document does show his entitlement to the Army Commendation Medal, the "V"
device was omitted.

5.  The applicant departed Vietnam in February 1967 and completed his
enlistment contract at Fort Hood, Texas.  He was released from active duty,
in pay grade E-5, on 28 August 1967.  His service was characterized as
honorable.

6.  A review of Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and
Campaign Participation Credit Register) notes the applicant’s unit was
credited with participating in two designated campaigns (Vietnam
Counteroffensive and Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase II) during the
applicant’s period of assignment.  Two bronze service stars, vice the one
bronze service star currently recorded with his Vietnam Service Medal on
his separation document, should reflect his campaign participation.  The
unit was also awarded a Valorous Unit Award, a Meritorious Unit
Commendation, and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation
with Palm during his tenure with the organization.  The unit awards were
also omitted from his separation document.

7.  Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time when the service member
was discharged, required that throughout a qualifying period of service for
award of the Good Conduct Medal the enlisted person must have had all
“excellent” conduct and efficiency ratings and no convictions by a court-
martial.  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.  With the publication of the new Army Regulation 672-5-1, in 1974,
the requirement for all excellent conduct and efficiency ratings was
dropped and an individual was required to show that he/she willingly
complied with the demands of the military environment, had been loyal and
obedient, and faithfully supported the goals of his organization and the
Army.  Today, Army Regulation 600-8-22, which replaced Army Regulation 672-
5-1, notes that there is no automatic entitlement to the Army Good Conduct
Medal and disqualification must be justified.  Current practice requires
that the commander provide written notice of nonfavorable consideration and
permits the individual to respond.  The applicant’s conduct and efficiency
ratings throughout his military service were excellent.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence confirms the applicant was awarded an Army Commendation
Medal with "V" device for his heroic actions on 13 January 1967.  While his
separation document does reflect entitlement to the Army Commendation
Medal, it appears, based on the fact there is no evidence of any other
award of the Army Commendation Medal, that the "V" device was merely
omitted from the entry on his separation document.

2.  The evidence also confirms that the applicant is entitled to two bronze
service stars on his Vietnam Service Medal, a Valorous Unit Award, a
Meritorious Unit Commendation, and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross
Unit Citation with Palm.  There is no evidence the applicant is entitled to
a Presidential Unit Citation.

3.  While the evidence does show that the former service member was
punished on one occasion under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform
Code of Military Justice, it is also noted that he received excellent
conduct and efficiency ratings, was promoted to pay grade E-5, completed
his entire enlistment contract, and received an honorable characterization
of service upon separation.  As such, in the interest of compassion and
equity, the former service member’s single record of minor misconduct
should be excused and he should be awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal for
the period 28 August 1964 through 27 August 1967.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

__TK  ___  ___RD__  __JM ___  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:

      a.  by showing that his Army Commendation Medal was awarded for valor
by adding the "V" device to the entry on his separation document;


      b.  by showing that he is entitled to two bronze service stars on his
Vietnam Service Medal, a Valorous Unit Award, a Meritorious Unit
Commendation, and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation
with Palm; and
      c.  by awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period
27 August 1964 through 28 August 1967.

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
award of the Presidential Unit Citation.




                            ______Ted Kanamine________
                                      CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050004636                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20051222                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |PARTIAL GRANT                           |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |107.00                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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