IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	        23 JULY 2009

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090003436 


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 that his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the U.S. Report of Transfer or Discharge) be corrected to show a second award of the Bronze Star Medal.

2.  The applicant states that he received a letter from the Department of the Army (DA) saying he was awarded a second Bronze Star Medal. 

3.  The applicant provides copies of his DD Form 214, dated 13 April 1971; General Orders Number 10342, dated 19 October 1970; a Bronze Star Medal certificate, dated 19 October 1970; a Bronze Star Medal certificate, dated 
19 April 1971; and a letter from the U.S. Army Reserve Components Personnel and Administration Center, dated 5 December 1972.

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's military personnel record shows that he was inducted into the Army of the United States on 28 May 1969 for a 2-year period.  He successfully completed basic combat training and advanced individual training.  He was awarded military occupational specialty 11E (Armor Crewman).

3.  While assigned to the Republic of Vietnam, the applicant was assigned to Company B, 2nd Battalion, 34th Armor, 25th Infantry Division from 14 May to 13 November 1970.  He was reassigned to H Troop, 17th Cavalry, on                23 November 1970, and he remained assigned to this unit until 13 April 1971.

4.  Item 41 (Awards and Decorations) of the applicant's DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) does not show a second award of the Bronze Star Medal formally known as the Bronze Star Medal with First Oak Leaf Cluster.  There is an entry for the Bronze Star Medal and the award authority is General Order Number 10342 published by Headquarters, 25th Infantry Division, dated October 1970.  

5.  On 13 April 1971, the applicant was honorably released from active duty and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group (Reinforcement).  Records show he completed 1 year, 10 months, and 16 days of active service and he served in the Republic of Vietnam for a period of 11 months and 10 days.

6.  Item 24 (Decorations, Medal, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant's DD Form 214, which he authenticated with his own signature, that shows the Bronze Star Medal, the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal, the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with 1960 Device, the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Automatic Rifle Bar, and the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar.

7.  There are no orders in the applicant's military personnel service records awarding him the Bronze Star Medal with First Oak Leaf Cluster.  His records do show that General Orders Number 10342, dated 19 October 1970, published by Headquarters, 25th Infantry Division, awarded him the Bronze Star Medal for meritorious achievement in connection with military operations against a hostile force.  The dates of action were 17 September to 17 October 1970. 

8.  Review of the Awards and Decorations Computer-Assisted Retrieval System (ADCARS), an index of general orders issued during the Vietnam era between 1965 and 1973 maintained by the Military Awards Branch of the United States Army Human Resources Command, failed to reveal any orders awarding the applicant the Bronze Star Medal with First Oak Leaf Cluster.  ADCARS did produce a copy of General Orders Number 10342, dated 19 October 1970, awarding the applicant the Bronze Star Medal.  This award order is the same award order that the applicant provided as evidence in support of his application.

9.  The applicant provided as supporting evidence a letter from the U.S. Army Reserve Components Personnel and Administration Center, dated 5 December 1972, that states, in effect, the applicant received an award of the Bronze Star Medal and that the orders for the medal were not forwarded with the certificate.  The letter further stated that to prevent further delay in presenting the applicant the Bronze Star Medal it was mailed without orders. 

10.  The applicant provided two colored copies of Bronze Star Medal certificates, the first shows he was awarded the medal on 19 October 1970 for meritorious achievement in the Republic of Vietnam from 17 September to 17 October 1970. This certificate is not signed.  The signature block was prepared for Major General Edward B______.  The second certificate shows that on 19 April 1971 the applicant’s commanding general awarded him the Bronze Star Medal for service in the Republic of Vietnam from May 1970 to April 1971.  This certificate is signed by Major General James L. B________.   

11.  United States Army Vietnam Regulation 672-1 (Military Awards) governed the military awards program in Vietnam during the Vietnam War.  This regulation stated that the Bronze Star Medal may have been awarded for heroism, meritorious achievement or service which did not involve aerial flight, but which was performed in connection with military operations against an armed enemy including combat, support, and supply operations.  As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required.  The first oak leaf cluster is awarded to denote the second and succeeding awards of certain decorations, among which is the Bronze Star Medal.

12.  Army Regulation 600-8-104 (Military Personnel Information Management/Records) prescribes the policies governing the OMPF, the MPRJ, the Career Management Individual File, and Army Personnel Qualification Records.  In pertinent part, this regulation states that for U.S. military decorations the only acceptable source documentation is the order, letter, or memorandum which awards the decoration.  Award certificates, citations or separation certificates alone will not be the basis for entry of a decoration.  



DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his record should be corrected to show two awards of the Bronze Star Medal, known as the Bronze Star Medal with Oak Leaf Cluster.

2.  The evidence of record shows the applicant was awarded one Bronze Star Medal through the publication and announcement of general orders.  General Orders Number 10342, dated 19 October 1970, was found in the applicant’s Official Personnel Military Record and in the ADCARS computerized repository of Republic of Vietnam general orders.  The applicant possessed a legible copy of this order.

3.  There is no evidence of record specifically no general orders, available announcing the applicant was awarded the Bronze Star Medal with First Oak Leaf Cluster to denote a second award of the Bronze Star Medal.  The letter from the U.S. Army Reserve Components Personnel and Administration Center shows that in 1972 he received a Bronze Star Medal certificate without official orders announcing the award, and that this center did not have general orders in their possession announcing award of the Bronze Star Medal. 

4.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  

5.  The applicant and all others concerned should know that this action in no way diminishes the sacrifices made by him in service to our Nation.  The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of his service in arms.  

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___X_____  ____X____  ____X____  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

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.




      _______ _   XXX_______   ___
               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)                                         AR20090003436



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090003436



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1