RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	    


	BOARD DATE:	  30 October 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070008226 


	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.


Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano

Director

Mr. Michael L. Engle

Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:


Ms. Carmen Duncan

Chairperson

Mr. Chester A. Damian

Member

Mr. Ronald D. Gant

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, correction of his Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge (DD Form 214) to show his awards of the Army Commendation Medal, Meritorious Unit Commendation, and the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16). 

2.  The applicant states that he received the Army Commendation Medal and the paperwork after his discharge and, therefore, it was never entered on his DD Form 214.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 but did not include the paperwork for the Army Commendation Medal.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  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 also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  On 11 April 1967, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years.  He completed his initial training and was awarded military occupational specialty 36K2O (Field Wireman). 

3.  Special Orders Number 104, 8th Battalion, 7th Artillery, Fort Bliss, Texas, dated 1 June 1968, awarded the applicant the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-14).  The applicant's Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows in Item 29 (Qualification in Arms) that he qualified as an expert on 22 May 1969 with the M-14 rifle, and on 21 August 1969 with the M-16 rifle.         



4.  On 3 October 1969, the applicant was assigned for duty as a field switchboard operator with the 18th Engineer Brigade, in the Republic of Vietnam.  On 
9 October 1969, he was reassigned for duty as a field wireman with the 
20th Engineer Battalion.  He was returned to the United States on 24 March 1970.

5.  On 26 March 1970, the applicant was released from active duty.  He had attained the rank of specialist four (pay grade E-4) and had completed 
2 years, 11 months, and 16 days of creditable active duty.

6.  Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized), of the applicant's DD Form 214, lists his awards as the National Defense Service Medal, Vietnam Service Medal, Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal, and the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-14).  It does not show award of the Meritorious Unit Commendation, Army Commendation Medal, or the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16). 

7.  There is no available evidence in the applicant’s records or on the Awards and Decorations Computer Assisted Retrieval (ADCAR) System showing that he was awarded an Army Commendation Medal. 

8.  Review of the applicant's records indicates entitlement to additional awards and decorations that are not shown on his DD Form 214.

9.  Item 38 (Record of Assignments) of the applicant's Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows that his conduct and efficiency were excellent.  The applicant’s records do not contain any evidence of disciplinary action.  There is no evidence to show that the commander took any action to deny him the Army Good Conduct Medal. 

10.  Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time, provided that the Army Good Conduct Medal was awarded to individuals who had completed 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.  The enlisted person must have had all "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings and no convictions by a court-martial.  Ratings of "Unknown" for portions of the period under consideration are not disqualifying.  Service and efficiency ratings based upon academic proficiency of at least "Good" rendered subsequent to 22 November 1955 are not disqualifying. 

11.  Appendix B of Army Regulation 600-8-22 shows that based on the applicant's dates of service in the Republic of Vietnam, he participated in the following two campaign periods: the   Vietnam Summer-Fall 1969 and the Vietnam Winter-Spring 1970.  This same regulation states that a bronze service star will be awarded for wear on the Vietnam Service Medal for participation in each campaign.  

12.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) lists the unit awards received by units serving in the Republic of Vietnam.  This publication shows that the 20th Engineer Battalion, during the time of the applicant's assignment, was cited in Department of the Army General Orders Number 48, dated 1971, for award of the Meritorious Unit Commendation.  

13.  Department of the Army General Orders 8, dated 1974, announced award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross, with Palm Unit Citation, for service in Vietnam to Headquarters, United States Army Vietnam and its subordinate units during the period 20 July 1965 to 28 March 1973.
 
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that he was awarded the Army Commendation Medal and has the paperwork for it.  However, he did not provide any of this documentation and his records do not contain any orders or other evidence showing that he was awarded this medal.  Should the applicant have, or be able to obtain, a copy of the orders awarding him the Army Commendation Medal, he may submit another application to this Board for reconsideration.  Therefore, his records should not be corrected to add this award.

2.  The applicant’s records clearly show that he distinguished himself in the performance of his military service.  Therefore, it is presumed that his not receiving an Army Good Conduct Medal for his service was an oversight.  Accordingly, he should be awarded this medal.

3.  The applicant’s unit was cited in general orders for award of the Meritorious Unit Commendation.  Therefore, his records should be corrected to show this unit award.

4.  Records show that the applicant participated in two campaign periods during his service in the Republic of Vietnam.  Therefore, he is eligible for award of two bronze service stars to be affixed to his Vietnam Service Medal.

5.  The applicant’s unit was cited in general orders for award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation.  Therefore, his records should be corrected to show this foreign unit award.

6.  The applicant's records show that he qualified as an expert with both the M-14 and M-16 rifles.  There is no evidence showing that he qualified as a sharpshooter with the M-16.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

__CD___  __RDG__  __CAD __  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.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by:

	a.  awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period from 
11 April 1967 to 26 March 1970; and
	
b.  showing that, in addition to the awards shown on his DD Form 214, his authorized awards include the Meritorious Unit Commendation; two bronze service stars to be affixed to his already-awarded Vietnam Service Medal; and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation.










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 addition of the Army Commendation Medal and Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar to his DD Form 214.




	__      Carmen Duncan____
          		CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20070008226
SUFFIX

RECON
 
DATE BOARDED
20071030 
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
 
DATE OF DISCHARGE
                          
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY

DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
GRANT                
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.
107
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.