RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:            07 September 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:   AR20060003146


      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:

|     |Ms. Susan Powers                  |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Jonathan Rost                 |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. David Haasenritter            |     |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 he be issued a DD Form 215 that
reflects, consolidates and updates all of his authorized awards and
service.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that all of his authorized awards and
service are not reflected on his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation) and he
desires to have all of his service and awards reflected on that document.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 dated 3 March 1969,
his NGB Form 22 (Report of Separation) dated 15 June 1995, and a letter
from the National Personnel Records Center dated 5 June 2005 indicating his
authorized awards.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on 15 June 1995.  The application submitted in this case is dated
20 February 2006.

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.  He was born on 28 September 1946 and enlisted in the Regular Army in
Cleveland, Ohio on 4 March 1966 for a period of 3 years.  He completed his
basic combat training at Fort Benning, Georgia, and his advanced individual
training (AIT) at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, before being
transferred to Fort Lewis, Washington, for assignment to the 139th Supply
Company for duty as a repair parts specialist.

4.  On 29 September 1966, he was transferred to Vietnam with his unit and
remained there until 22 September 1967, when he was transferred to Fort
Lee, Virginia.

5.  He remained at Fort Lee until he was honorably released from active
duty (REFRAD) on 3 March 1969, due to the expiration of his term of service
(ETS).  He had served 3 years of total active service and was awarded the
Good Conduct Medal, the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service
Medal (VSM) and the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal.

6.  He enlisted in the Ohio Army National Guard (OHARNG) on 18 June 1976
and continued to serve with the OHARNG as a helicopter crew chief until
15 June 1995, when he was honorably discharged and was transferred to the
Retired Reserve in the pay grade of E-5.  He had 24 years, 11 months and
28 days of service for pay purposes.

7.  A review of his records shows that he served in two campaigns while in
Vietnam and his unit was awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross
with Palm (RVNGC w/Palm) Unit Citation during the period he served with the
unit.

8.  Army Regulation 635-5 serves as the authority for the preparation of
the DD Form 214.  It provides, in pertinent part, that a DD Form 214 will
be issued upon release from active duty (REFRAD) or discharge.  Information
contained on that form will be information that exists as of the date of
the separation.  Correction to the DD Form 214 will be accomplished by
issuing a Correction to DD Form 214 (DD Form 215) to correct incorrect or
missing information that should be reflected on that document as of the
separation date.  A DD Form 215 will not be used to add information or
events that occurred subsequent to the separation date on the DD Form 214.


DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant was awarded the VSM with two bronze service stars and the
RVNGC w/Palm Unit Citation for his service in Vietnam; however, his DD Form
214 does not reflect the two bronze service stars or the award of the RVNGC
w/Palm Unit Citation.  Therefore, it would be appropriate to add those
awards at this time.

2.  While it is understandable that the applicant desires to have all of
his service and awards consolidated on his DD Form 214, the DD Form 214 is
issued only upon REFRAD or discharge and the applicable regulation does not
allow information or events that occur after the separation date to be
entered on that form.

3.  The applicant was issued a NGB Form 22 to reflect his service and
awards in the OHARNG, accordingly, there appears to be no basis to make any
further changes to that form.

4.  Evidence shows that the applicant’s records contain administrative
error which does not require action by the Board.  Therefore,
administrative correction of the applicant’s records will be accomplished
by the Case Management Support Division (CMSD), St. Louis, Missouri, as
outlined by the Board in paragraph 3 of the BOARD
DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION section below.

5.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 15 June 1995; therefore, the time for
the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice
expired on 14 June 1998.  The applicant did not file within the 3-year
statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation or
evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
failure to timely file in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___DH __  ___JR __  ___SP___  DENY APPLICATION (W/NOTE)

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented does not demonstrate
the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board
determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis
for correction of the records of the individual concerned.

2.  As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence
provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year
statute of limitations prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient
basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for
correction of the records of the individual concerned.




3.  The Board determined that administrative error in the records of the
individual should be corrected.  Therefore, the Board requests that the
CMSD-St. Louis administratively correct the records of the individual
concerned to show that he was awarded two bronze service stars for wear on
his already awarded VSM and that he was awarded the RVNGC w/Palm Unit
Citation.





                                  _____Susan Powers_____
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060003146                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060907                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD)                                    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |19690303                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |ETS                                     |
|BOARD DECISION          |(DENY w/note)                           |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |AR 15-185                               |
|ISSUES                  |189/corr 214                            |
|1.110.0000              |                                        |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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