IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  24 January 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110011979 


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 correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer of Discharge) to show:

* primary military occupational specialty (PMOS) – 11E (Armor Crewman)
* secondary MOS (SMOS) – 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman)
* Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM) (2nd Award)
* Presidential Unit Citation (PUC)

2.  The applicant states upon his promotion to E-5 he was awarded PMOS 11E.  He believes 11B should be listed as his SMOS.  Further, he was awarded a second AGCM and his unit, Company B, 1st Battalion, 7th Cavalry Regiment, 1st Cavalry Division, was awarded the PUC.

3.  The applicant provides:

* DD Form 214 effective 6 July 1969
* Headquarters, 3rd Infantry Division, Special Orders Number 291, dated 30 October 1968
* Headquarters, 3rd Infantry Division, General Orders Number 175, dated 8 July 1968

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 on 23 July 1965 and he was awarded MOS 11B on 26 March 1966.  He served in Vietnam with Company B, 1st Battalion, 7th Cavalry Regiment, 1st Cavalry Division, from on or about 19 April 1966 to 11 April 1967.  A review of his military personnel record shows:

	a.  General Orders Number 4118 issued by 1st Cavalry Division (Airmobile) on 17 December 1966 awarded him the Air Medal for meritorious achievement while participating in aerial flight from 19 April to 6 November 1966;

	b.  General Orders Number 175 issued by 3rd Infantry Division on 8 July 1968 awarded him the Army Good Conduct Medal (2nd Award) for the period 23 July 1965 through 22 July 1968;

	c.  Special Orders Number 192 issued by 3rd Infantry Division withdrew PMOS 11B2O and awarded him PMOS 11E2O and SMOS 11B2O effective 11 July 1968; and

	d.  Special Orders Number 291 issued by 3rd Infantry Division on 30 October 1968 announced his appointment from the rank/pay grade of specialist four (SP4)/E-4 to the temporary (T) rank/pay grade of specialist five (SP5)/E-5 in MOS 11E effective 7 October 1968.

3.  He was honorably released from active duty on 6 July 1969 and he was transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group (Reinforcement).  His DD Form 214 shows he completed 3 years, 11 months, and 14 days of creditable active service.  This form also shows in:

	a.  item 23a (Specialty Number and Title), "11B2O LT W INF" and

	b.  item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) the:

* Combat Infantryman Badge
* Army Commendation Medal 
* Vietnam Campaign Medal
* Vietnam Service Medal
* National Defense Service Medal
* Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-14)
* two overseas service bars

4.  His records do not contain official orders awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal.  However, a review of his service record also shows no derogatory information that would disqualify him for the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.  Item 38 (Record of Assignments) of his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows he received "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings during his military service.

5.  Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Awards), in effect at the time, provided that the Army 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.

6.  A review of his records indicates his entitlement to additional awards that are not shown on his DD Form 214.

7.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) shows Company B, 1st Battalion, 7th Cavalry, was cited for awards of the:

* Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation for service from 17 November 1965 to 19 May 1969 based on Department of the Army General Orders (DAGO) Number 70, dated 1969 (amended by DAGO 59, dated 1969)
* Presidential Unit Citation for the period 12 December 1966 to 18 February 1967 based on DAGO Number 2, dated 1973

8.  Appendix B of Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) shows that during his service in Vietnam, participation credit was awarded for the following campaigns.  This regulation further states a bronze service star will be awarded for wear on the Vietnam Service Medal for participation in each campaign.

* Vietnam Counteroffensive – 25 December 1965 to 30 June 1966
* Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase II – 1 July 1966 to 31 May 1967

9.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) establishes the standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214.  Chapter 2 of the regulation in effect at the time contained guidance on the preparation of the DD Form 214.  It stated that item 23 shows the PMOS code number and title.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record shows the applicant was awarded PMOS 11B on 26 March 1966.  A subsequent order awarded him PMOS 11E and SMOS 11B.  His DD Form 214 for the period ending 6 July 1969 shows 11B as his specialty.  It appears that his MOS is incorrectly listed on his DD Form 214 and it would be appropriate to show his MOS as "11E Armor Crewman."  Regulatory guidance in effect at the time stated that only the PMOS would be listed.

2.  General orders awarded him the Air Medal which is not shown on his DD Form 214; therefore, he is entitled to correction of his DD Form 214 to show this award.

3.  General orders also award him the AGCM (2nd Award) for the period 23 July 1965 to 22 July 1968.  His record does not contain orders awarding him the AGCM (1st Award) and because the period covered in this order begins on his entry date, it is presumed that the order was issued erroneously and should be for his first award.

4.  The evidence of record confirms he served honorably, attained the rank of SP5/E-5, served in Vietnam, and received "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings throughout his military service.  Lacking any derogatory information on file that would have disqualified him, it would be appropriate to award the applicant the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 23 July 1965 to 22 July 1968.

5.  General orders awarded his unit the Presidential Unit Citation and Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation which are not shown on his DD Form 214.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his records to show these unit awards.

6.  The evidence of record shows he was awarded the Vietnam Service Medal.  Additionally, he participated in two campaigns while serving in the Republic of Vietnam.  Therefore, he is entitled to two bronze service stars to be affixed to his already-awarded Vietnam Service Medal.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

____x___  ____x___  ____x___  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined the evidence presented is 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.  deleting the entry from item 23a of his DD Form 214;

	b.  adding the entry "11E ARMOR CREWMAN" to item 23a of his DD Form 214; and

	c.  adding the following awards to item 24 of his DD Form 214:

* Air Medal
* Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award)
* Presidential Unit Citation
* RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation
* two bronze service stars to be affixed to his already-awarded Vietnam Service Medal

2.  The Board further determined 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 adding SMOS 11B or AGCM (2nd Award) to his DD Form 214.



      ____________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)                                         AR20110011979



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110011979



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1