RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:        .


      BOARD DATE:            19 December 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:   AR20060007194


      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. Kathleen Newman               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Paul Smith                    |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. John Moeller                  |     |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 awarded the Good Conduct
Medal and that his records be corrected to reflect his marksmanship awards
and all other authorized awards to which he is entitled.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that all of his awards were not
included on his DD Form 214 at the time of his release from active duty
(REFRAD).

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 and his Enlisted
Qualification Record (DA Form 20).

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on 2 September 1969.  The application submitted in this case is
dated 11 May 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 inducted in Beckley, West Virginia, on 29 August 1966 and was
transferred to Fort Jackson, South Carolina.  He was honorably discharged
on 2 September 1966 for the purpose of enlisting in the Regular Army.  He
enlisted in the Regular Army on 3 September 1966 for a period of 3 years
and training as an automotive repair parts specialist.

4.  He completed his basic combat training at Fort Jackson and was
transferred to Fort Lee, Virginia, to undergo his advanced individual
training (AIT).  He completed his AIT and was transferred to Fort Meade,
Maryland where he remained until he was transferred to Vietnam on 22 July
1967.  He was assigned to the 630th Engineer Company for duty as a supply
and parts specialist.  He was advanced to the pay grade of E-3 on 8 August
1967.

5.  On 1 June 1968, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against him
for the wrongful possession of 15 marijuana cigarettes.  His punishment
consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-2, a forfeiture of pay and
restriction.

6.  He departed Vietnam on 21 July 1968 for assignment to an artillery
battery in Tappan, New York, where he remained until he was reassigned to
an artillery battery in Oakdale, Pennsylvania, on 4 November 1968.

7.  On 19 June 1969, NJP was imposed against the applicant for stealing a
radio belonging to another Soldier.  His punishment consisted of a
reduction to the pay grade of E-2 (suspended for 60 days) and a forfeiture
of pay.

8.  On 2 September 1969, he was honorably REFRAD in the pay grade of E-3,
due to the expiration of his term of service.  He had served 3 years and 4
days of total active service and his DD Form 214 issued at the time of his
REFRAD indicates that he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal,
the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM) and the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal.


9.  A review of the applicant’s records shows that the applicant had
conduct and efficiency ratings of “Excellent”, “Good”, “Poor”, and
“Satisfactory” during the course of his enlistment.  There is no evidence
to show that he was awarded the GCMDL for his service.

10.  His records also show that he was awarded two overseas service bars,
the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with rifle bar and the
Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with rifle bar.

11.  Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time, provided policy and
criteria concerning individual military decorations.  It stated that the
Army Good Conduct Medal was awarded for each 3 years of continuous enlisted
active Federal military service completed on or after 27 August 1940 and,
for the first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June
1950 of less than 3 years but more than 1 year.  At the time, a Soldier's
conduct and efficiency ratings must have been rated as "excellent" for the
entire period of qualifying service except that a service school efficiency
rating based upon academic proficiency of at least "good" rendered
subsequent to 11 November 1956 was not disqualifying.  However, there was
no right or entitlement to the medal until the immediate commander made a
positive recommendation for its award and until the awarding authority
announced the award in General Orders.

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  during the period he was assigned to the
unit.  Additionally, he participated in four campaigns and thus is
authorized to wear four bronze service stars on his already awarded VSM.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contention that he should have been awarded the GCMDL
has been noted; however, given his disciplinary record and his conduct and
efficiency ratings of record, it must be presumed that the commander at the
time made a conscious decision not to recommend him for that award.
Likewise, the Board does not find that he should have received the award of
the GCMDL as well.

2.  The applicant’s contention that all of his awards were not included on
his DD Form 214 has also been noted and found to have merit.  The applicant
was awarded two overseas service bars, the Sharpshooter Marksmanship
Qualification Badge with rifle bar and the Marksman Marksmanship
Qualification Badge with rifle bar.  Accordingly, they should be added at
this time.

3.  Additionally, the applicant was authorized to be awarded the RVNGC
w/Palm Unit Citation and four bronze service stars for wear on his already
awarded VSM.

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 2 September 1969; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on 1 September 1972.  The applicant did not file within
the 3-year statute of limitations; however, based on the available
(evidence or argument), it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
failure to timely file in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

___KN __  ___PS __  ________  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 the
applicant was awarded two overseas service bars, the Sharpshooter
Marksmanship Qualification Badge with rifle bar, the Marksman Marksmanship
Qualification Badge with rifle bar, the RVNGC w/Palm Unit Citation and four
bronze service stars for wear on his already awarded VSM.

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 GCMDL.




                            ____Kathleen Newman_____
                                      CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060007194                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20061219                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD)                                    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |19690902                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |ETS                                     |
|BOARD DECISION          |(PARTIAL GRANT)                         |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |AR 15-185                               |
|ISSUES                  |102/GCMDL                               |
|1.107.0056              |                                        |
|2.107.0094              |140/RVNGC                               |
|3.110.0000              |189/CORR 214                            |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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