IN THE CASE OF:	   

		BOARD DATE:	  1 May 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130016215 


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 the Air Medal (AM) and Participation in U.S. Joint Task Force Leo in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, his U.S. Joint Task Force Leo – Congo Certificate and his AM were not included on his DD Form 214.

3.  The applicant provides his AM Certificate, dated 3 May 1965, and U.S. Joint Task Force Leo – Congo Certificate.

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 inducted into the Army of the United States on 21 January 1964.  He completed training and was awarded military occupational specialty 11C (Indirect Fire Crewman).

3.  Item 31 (Foreign Service) of the applicant's DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows he served in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) during the period 16 August 1965 to 17 January 1966.  He was assigned to Company A, 2d Battalion, 12th Cavalry Regiment, 1st Cavalry Division.

4.  Item 38 (Record of Assignments) of his DA Form 20 shows he received "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings throughout his period of service.  There is no evidence of any disciplinary action during his period of active service.  There also is no evidence of a commander's disqualification for the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM).

5.  His records contain the following documentation pertaining to the applicant:

* Department of the Army Office of the Adjutant General memorandum, dated 12 May 1965, announcing his award of the AM
* Headquarters, 2d Infantry Division, General Orders Number 34, dated 24 February 1965, awarding him the Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) for meritorious service during the period 21 November 1964 to 21 December 1964

6.  On 18 January 1966, he was honorably released from active duty in the rank/grade of specialist four/E-4.  He completed 1 year, 11 months, and 28 days of total active service with no lost time.  His DD Form 214 shows he was awarded or authorized the:

* Vietnam Service Medal (VSM)
* Combat Infantryman Badge
* 1st Class Gunner Badge
* Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Pistol Bar (.45 Caliber)

7.  He provided:

* AM Certificate, dated 3 May 1965, for meritorious achievement while participating in aerial flight during the period 21 November 1964 to 21 December 1964
* U.S. Joint Task Force Leo – Congo Certificate for service during the period August 1964-August 1965

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) contains the regulatory guidance for the VSM and states a bronze service star is authorized with this award for each Vietnam campaign a member is credited with participating in.  Appendix B shows that during his service in Vietnam, participation credit was awarded for the following two campaigns:

* Vietnam Defense (8 March-24 December 1965)
* Vietnam Counteroffensive (25 December 1965-30 June 1966)

9.  Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Decorations and Awards), in effect at the time, stated the AGCM was awarded for each 3 years of continuous enlisted active Federal military service completed on or after 27 August 1940 and, for the first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June 1950 of less than 3 years but more than 1 year.  The enlisted person must have had all "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings.

10.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), in effect at the time, prescribed the separation documents prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army.  It established standardized policy for preparation of the DD Form 214.  It stated to list awards and decorations for all periods of service in the priority sequence specified in Army Regulation 600-8-22.  Only decorations, medals, and ribbons are listed.  Certificates of achievement, letters of appreciation, and similar documents are not listed.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  General orders awarded the applicant the AM for meritorious achievement.  Therefore, his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show this award.

2.  General orders awarded the applicant the ARCOM for meritorious service.  Therefore, his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show this award.

3.  His records show he received all "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings throughout his service.  There is no record of any disciplinary actions or a commander's disqualification that would have precluded him from being awarded the first award of the AGCM.  It appears he was not awarded the first award of the AGCM as a result of an administrative error.  Therefore, it would be appropriate at this time to award him the AGCM (1st Award) for the period 21 January 1964 through 17 January 1966 and to correct his DD Form 214 to show this award.

4.  The evidence of record shows he participated in two campaigns while serving in the RVN.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of this DD Form 214 to add two bronze service stars to his previously-awarded VSM.

5.  Certificates of achievement, letters of appreciation, and similar documents are not authorized for entry on the DD Form 214.

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:

* awarding him the AGCM (1st Award) for the period 21 January 1964 through 17 January 1966
* deleting award of the VSM from his DD Form 214
* adding the following awards to his DD Form 214 –

* AM
* ARCOM (1st Award)
* AGCM (1st Award)
* VSM with two bronze service stars

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 his U.S. Joint Task Force Leo – Congo Certificate 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)                                         AR20130016215



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130016215



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1