IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  24 June 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090020121 


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 records be corrected to reflect award of the Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) with four oak leaf clusters (5th Award), seven awards of the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM), the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-14), and 31 days of sea service in block 12g (Sea Service) of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he should have received seven awards of the AGCM because he served 21 years of active service.  He goes on to state he qualified as expert with the M-14 rifle in basic training and that award should be reflected in his records.  He also states he was awarded five ARCOM's; however, his DD Form 214 only reflects the ARCOM with one oak leaf cluster.  He continues by stating he took a ship to Vietnam that took 31 days and there is no entry of sea service on his DD Form 214.

3.  The applicant provides copies of two DD Forms 214, five ARCOM certificates, a letter of recommendation, and a letter of appreciation from a colonel.

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 enlisted in the Regular Army in Portland, Oregon, on 23 August 1963 for a period of 3 years.  He completed his training and remained on active duty through a series of continuous reenlistments.  He was promoted to the pay grade of E-7 on 1 April 1978.

3.  On 31 July 1984, he was honorably retired and transferred to the Retired List effective 1 August 1984.  He had served 20 years, 11 months, and 8 days of total active service and his DD Form 214 issued at the time shows he was awarded the AGCM (6th Award), the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal, the Vietnam Campaign Medal, the ARCOM (1st Oak Leaf Cluster), the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16), the Army Service Ribbon, the Overseas Service Ribbon with Numeral 2, and the Mechanic Badge.  In block 12g is the entry "00  00  00."

4.  In June 1987, the applicant dispatched a letter to the Army Reserve Personnel Center (ARPERCEN) requesting that his DD Form 214 be corrected to reflect five awards of the ARCOM.  Officials at the ARPERCEN responded in September 1987 to the effect that his official records only contained orders for the original and the ARCOM 1OLC and further advised him that if he provided orders for all of the awards, action would be taken to correct his records.

5.  A review of the applicant's records shows the applicant served in Vietnam from 23 November 1966 to 2 October 1967.  However, the records do not indicate the method of travel to Vietnam, nor do they contain any orders authorizing him to perform sea duty en route to Vietnam.

6.  The applicant's records do not contain any orders or entries indicating he qualified with the M-14 rifle.  His records do show his first award of the AGCM was for a period of 3 years and he continued to receive awards of the AGCM for every 3-year period thereafter.

7.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides that the Army Commendation Medal may be awarded to any member of the Armed Forces of the United States who, while serving in any capacity with the Army after 6 December 1941, distinguished himself or herself by heroism, meritorious achievement, or meritorious service.  As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides that the AGCM is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency, and fidelity during 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.

9.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) serves as the authority for the preparation of the DD Form 214.  It provides that entries in block 12g will reflect the amount of time reflected in orders that sea duty was required to be performed.  Sea pay is authorized for those individuals who are assigned for duty on a vessel by competent orders.  Sea pay is not authorized for individuals who are on board a vessel for transportation, regardless of the length of the period.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  While the applicant has provided copies of five ARCOM certificates with his application, the applicable regulations required that in order for an award of the ARCOM to be entered in official records, orders awarding the ARCOM are required.  Therefore, in the absence of orders, the additional awards cannot be added at this time.

2.  The applicant's contention that he should have been awarded the 7th award of the AGCM has been noted and is found to lack merit.  The applicant was awarded the AGCM for every 3 years of active service (six awards) and he retired after serving 20 years, 11 months, and 8 days of active service, just short of the 21 years of service needed to be awarded the 7th award of the AGCM.  Accordingly, he is not entitled to an additional award of the AGCM because only the first award of the AGCM can be made for a period of less than 3 years.

3.  While the sincerity of the applicant's contention that he qualified as expert with the M-14 rifle is not doubted, his records contain no indication of that qualification.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, there appears to be no basis to add that award at this time.

4.  The applicant's contention that his records do not reflect his sea service while en route to Vietnam has also been noted; however, service as a passenger on a sea going vessel does not constitute sea service under the definitions of the applicable regulations.  Sea service is primarily reserved for those Soldiers whose duty is as members of a crew of an ocean going vessel and who are on competent orders for sea pay.  Personnel who possess the military occupational specialty of a watercraft operator or watercraft mechanic are primary examples of personnel authorized credit for sea duty and who receive sea pay.  Accordingly, it appears that the applicant is not entitled credit for sea service.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____x____  ____x____  ____x____  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1. 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.  The Board wants the applicant and all others concerned to know that this action in no way diminishes the sacrifices made by the applicant in service to the United States during the Vietnam War.  The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of his service in arms.



      _____________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)                                         AR20090020121



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090020121



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1