DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090002777 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests he be issued a DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214) with various “notes” to correct nebulous discrepancies.

2.  The applicant states he is a Vietnam veteran and was a combat Soldier assigned to the 3rd Battalion, 5th Cavalry, 9th Infantry Division.  He states:

	a.  he turned down a “battlefield commission and other stuff” offered to him by a Major General;

	b.  he won a trophy in Basic Combat Training (BCT) for running a 4-minute mile;

	c.  when he was transferred to the 543rd Transportation Company, the commanding officer said he was going to promote him to Sergeant and place him in charge of 72 guards; and

	d.  he performed some sort of job wherein he told Soldiers they could receive free venereal disease treatment “off-the-record.”

The applicant adds he would like a DD Form 215 showing all of the above.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) for the period 2 February 1966 through 11 December 1967.

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.  The applicant was born in October 1946 and worked in a gas station.  On 2 February 1966, he was inducted into the Army of the United States for 2 years.

3.  The applicant completed BCT at Fort Knox, KY, where he qualified expert with the M-14 rifle and was awarded the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-14).

4.  The applicant underwent Advanced Individual Training (AIT) at Fort Riley, KS. He was trained in military occupational specialty (MOS) 11E (Armor Crewman).  During AIT, he qualified as a marksman with the M1911 Cal .45 pistol and as a sharpshooter with the M-16 rifle.  He was awarded the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16) and the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Pistol Bar (Cal .45).

5.  Following AIT, the applicant was permanently assigned to A Troop, 3rd Squadron, 5th Cavalry, 9th Infantry Division, Fort Riley.  The applicant was transferred with his unit to Vietnam on or about 12 December 1966.

6.  In Vietnam, the applicant sought and received a transfer from his combat unit to the 543rd Transportation Company where he performed duty as a security guard.  He served with the 543rd Transportation Company from 22 July 1967 to 9 December 1967.

7.  While a member of the 543rd Transportation Company, the applicant received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for drinking alcohol on guard duty on 30 July 1967.  As punishment, he was fined $20.00, restricted to the company area for 14 days, and given 7 days of extra duty.  His record does not reveal any courts-martial.

8.  The applicant departed Vietnam on or about 9 December 1967 en route to the US Army Personnel Center, Oakland Army Base, Oakland, CA.  He was honorably separated on 11 December 1967 after serving 1 year, 10 months, and 10 days of creditable active service.  His DD Form 214 shows his rank as Specialist Four (SP4/E-4) and that he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, Vietnam Service Medal, and Vietnam Campaign Medal.

9.  The applicant’s service record contains a DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record).  This form shows:

	a.  in Item 24 (Aptitude Tests) a GT score of 93;

	b.  in Item 25 (Other Tests) no entry score for the OCT (Officer Candidate Test);

	c.  in Item 33 (Appointments and Reductions) that he was appointed as a Private (PV1/E-1) on 2 February 1966; as a Private (PVT/E-2) on 2 June 1966; as a Private First Class (PFC/E-3) on 12 July 1966; and as a SP4 on 6 December 1966;

	d.  in Item 38 (Record of Assignments) that he achieved uniformly "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings; and

	e.  in item 41 (Awards and Decorations) that he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, Vietnam Service Medal, Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device 1960, Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-14), Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16), and Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Pistol Bar (Cal .45).

10.  Army Regulation (AR) 635-5 (Separation Documents) prescribes the separation documents that must be prepared for Soldiers on retirement, discharge, release from active duty service, or control of the Active Army.  It establishes standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214.  The DD Form 214 is a summary of a Soldier's most recent period of continuous active duty.  It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active duty service at the time of release from active duty, retirement, or discharge.  It also provides detailed instructions and identifies source documents for completing each block of the DD Form 214.

11.  AR 600-8-22 (Military Awards) sets forth Department of the Army criteria, policy and instructions concerning individual military awards, 

the Good Conduct Medal, service medals and service ribbons, combat and special skill badges and tabs, unit decorations, and trophies and similar devices awarded in recognition of accomplishments.  It provides:

	a.  during Vietnam, the Good Conduct Medal was awarded to individuals who completed a qualified period of active duty enlisted service.  This period was 3 years except in those cases when the period for the first award ended 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 were not disqualifying.  Service and efficiency ratings based upon academic proficiency of at least "Good" rendered subsequent to 22 November 1955 were not disqualifying; and

	b.  a bronze service star, based on qualifying service, is authorized for each campaign listed in Appendix B of this regulation and the authorized bronze service stars will be worn on the appropriate service medal.  During the applicant’s service there were two campaigns – Vietnam Counteroffensive, Phase II and Phase III.

12.  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 the units to which the applicant was assigned were cited for award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation for the period 8 February 1962 to 28 March 1973 by Department of the Army General Order Number 8, dated 1974.  It also shows that the 3rd Squadron, 5th Cavalry was awarded the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation for the period 19 December 1966 to 15 February 1968 by Department of the Army General Order Number 59, dated 1969, as amended by Department of the Army General Order Number 43, dated 1970.

13.  Regarding battlefield commissions during the Vietnam War, the Department of Defense has officially stated that there were no battlefield commissions awarded by the Army during the Vietnam War.  In September 1985, General William Westmoreland, who commanded all troops in Vietnam, stated “We did commission several NCO’s on the battlefield in Vietnam.”  In October 1985, General John K. Singlaub, who had commanded a Joint Unconventional Task Force in Vietnam, provided several examples of noncommissioned officers (NCO’s) who had received battlefield commissions in Vietnam.  He stated, “It was my impression at the time and remains so today that young NCO’s who 

performed particularly well were being promoted to officers during the conflict in Vietnam during the late 1960’s."  Nonetheless, the Department of Defense states this did not happen.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant requests a DD Form 215 be issued to reflect some alleged events in which he was involved.

2.  There is no record of the applicant being offered a “battlefield commission.”  Such commissions have been used throughout the history of the US Army; however, not officially during Vietnam.  Even if the offer had been made, AR 635-5 does not provide for any mention of it on an enlisted Soldier’s DD Form 214, except in indicating the reason for separation (i.e., to accept appointment as a commissioned officer).  The applicant never says he accepted a battlefield commission, only that he was “offered” one; there are no provisions in the regulation for annotating this “offer” on the DD Form 214/215.

3.  The applicant’s statement he was given a trophy for running a 4-minute mile is not disputed; however, track trophies are not authorized awards and decorations accepted for inclusion on the DD Form 214/215.

4.  The applicant was school-trained by the Army to be an Armor Crewman.  This job is properly annotated on his DD Form 214.  Soldiers routinely perform many extra duties not found within their military occupational specialty descriptions.  The applicant may have been asked to solicit Soldiers to accept treatment for sexually-transmitted diseases (STD's), but such an additional duty would not be authorized for inclusion on the DD Form 214/215.

5.  The applicant’s record shows he was promoted to SP4 on 6 December 1966. There is no evidence he was ever promoted to Sergeant, or that he was promised such a promotion.

6.  The applicant is in need of a DD Form 215 to correct certain entries on his DD Form 214 related to awards and decorations.  

	a.  The applicant had "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings and no convictions by courts-martial; he should have been awarded the Good Conduct Medal and this medal should have been added to his DD Form 214.


	b.  The applicant’s service in two campaigns – Vietnam Counteroffensive, Phase II and Phase III – should have been recognized by two bronze service stars affixed to his Vietnam Service Medal shown on his DD Form 214.

	c.  The applicant served in units which were awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation and the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation.  These foreign unit awards should be added to his DD Form 214 via a DD Form 215.

	d.  The applicant’s record shows he was awarded the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-14), Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16), and Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Pistol Bar (Cal .45).  These badges should be added to his DD Form 214 via a DD Form 215.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

___x____  ___x____  ___x____  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 a Good Conduct Medal for his service from 2 February 1966 through 11 December 1967; and

	b.  correcting his DD Form 214 to add the Good Conduct Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal with two bronze service stars, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation and the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation, the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-14), Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16), and Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Pistol Bar (Cal .45).

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 battlefield commissions, promised promotions to sergeant, track trophies, or soliciting Soldiers to get medical treatment for STD’s.  



      _______ _   __x_____   ___
               CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.



ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090002777





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090002777



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1