IN THE CASE OF:	  .

		BOARD DATE:	  24 January 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110015334 


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 or Discharge) to show award of:

* Bronze Star Medal with "V" Device (BSM w/"V")
* Air Medal (AM)
* Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM)
* Vietnam Service Medal with three Bronze Service Stars (VSM w/3BSS)
* Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with 1960 Device (RVNCM w/Device)
* Aircraft Crewman Badge (ACB)
* Letter of Recommendation

2.  The applicant states he believes these awards were omitted in error.

3.  The applicant provides copies of orders for the AM, BSM w/"V", and a Letter of Recommendation dated 26 May 1969.

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.  Evidence of record and background information:

	a.  On 8 September 1966, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army.  He completed his initial training and was awarded military occupational specialty 67N (Helicopter Mechanic).

	b.  Special Orders Number 241, Fort Dix, New Jersey, dated 17 November 1966 awarded the applicant the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar.

	c.  On 17 March 1967, the applicant departed Fort Rucker, Alabama for duty in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN).

	d.  On 23 April 1967, the applicant was assigned for duty with the 155th Aviation Company, 1st Aviation Brigade.

	e.  The following special orders (SO), issued by the 1st Aviation Brigade, awarded the applicant the indicated medal/badge:

* SO Number 66, dated 10 March 1968: ACB (Permanent)
* SO Number 1543, dated 19 March 1968: AM
* SO Number 1942, dated 5 April 1968: BSM w/"V"

	f.  On 9 June 1969, the applicant was released from active duty.  He had attained the rank of specialist five, pay grade E-5 and had completed 2 years, 
9 months and 2 days of creditable active duty.

	g.  Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant's DD Form 214, lists his awards as:

* NDSM [National Defense Service Medal]
* VCM w/60 Device [Vietnam Campaign Medal with 1960 Device]
* ARCOM [Army commendation Medal]
* VSM [Vietnam Service Medal]
* 2 O/S Bars [two Overseas service bars]

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

4.  Appendix B of Army Regulation 600-8-22 shows that based on the applicant's dates of service in the RVN, he participated in the following four campaign periods: the Vietnam Counteroffensive, Phase II; the Vietnam Counteroffensive, Phase III; the Tet Counteroffensive; and the Vietnam Counteroffensive, Phase IV.  This same regulation states that a bronze service star will be awarded for wear on the Vietnam Service Medal for participation in each campaign.

5.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) lists the unit awards received by units serving in the RVN.  This publication shows that the 155th Aviation Company, during the time of the applicant's assignment, was cited in Department of the Army General Orders (DAGO) Number 6, dated in 1974 for award of the RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation.

6.  Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Awards), in effect at the time, provided that the Army Good Conduct Medal was awarded to enlisted Soldiers who had completed a qualified 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 school efficiency ratings based upon academic proficiency of at least "good" rendered subsequent to 22 November 1955 are not disqualifying.

7.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), as in effect at the time, provided detailed instructions for completing separation documents, including the DD Form 214.  It provided that all decorations, medals, commendations, citations and campaign ribbons as shown on the DA Form 20 to be entered in Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show award of:

* Bronze Star Medal with "V" Device (BSM w/"V")
* Air Medal (AM)
* Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM)
* Vietnam Service Medal with three Bronze Service Stars (VSM w/3BSS)
* Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with 1960 Device (RVNCM w/Device)
* Aircraft Crewman Badge (ACB)
* Letter of Recommendation

2.  The evidence of record clearly shows that the applicant was awarded the NDSM, VCM w/60 Device and the ARCOM; and, that these awards were entered on his DD form 214.  However, it appears that the abbreviations used for their entry were not understood by the applicant.  Therefore all entries in Item 24 of his DD Form 214 should be removed and replaced without the use of abbreviations.

3.  Special orders awarded the applicant the BSM with "V" Device, AM, ACB, and the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar.  Therefore these medals and badges should be shown on his DD Form 214.

4.  The applicant’s records clearly show that he distinguished himself in the performance of his military service as evidenced by his attaining the rank of specialist five, receiving personal decorations heroism and meritorious service, and achieving "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings.  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.

5.  The applicant contends that he should have three bronze service stars on his VSM.  However, records show that the applicant participated in four campaign periods during his service in the Republic of Vietnam.  Therefore, he is eligible for award of four bronze service stars to be affixed to his already-awarded VSM.

6.  Records show that 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.

7.  The governing regulation does not provide for the entry of letters of recommendation on the DD Form 214.  Therefore, this portion of his application should be denied.





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.  deleting all entries in Item 24 of his DD Form 214;

	b.  awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period from 
8 September 1966 to 9 June 1969; and

	c.  showing in Item 24 of his DD Form 214:

* Bronze Star Medal with "V" Device
* Air Medal
* Army Commendation Medal
* Army Good Conduct Medal
* National Defense Service Medal
* Vietnam Service Medal with four bronze service stars
* Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation
* Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with 1960 Device
* Aircraft Crewman Badge
* Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar
* Two Overseas Service Bars








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 showing his letter of recommendation on 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)                                         AR20110015334





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110015334



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1