IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  23 April 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140014192 


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 Bronze Star Medal
* any additional awards and decorations to which he is entitled
* completion of mine sweeping training

2.  The applicant states that during a recent review of his military records provided by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), he discovered he was not awarded the Bronze Star Medal for active combat service and also realized that his mine sweeping training was not reflected on his DD Form 214.  In his research, he discovered that the Bronze Star Medal is awarded to service members with active combat duty in foreign countries and he believes that he is as deserving of the Bronze Star Medal for his service as others were for serving their country.  He is a disabled veteran who receives disability benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) due to prostate cancer linked to herbicide exposure, diabetes, and hearing loss.

3.  The applicant provides his DD Form 214 and a letter from the VA regarding their increase in his service-connected compensation.

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 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 20 July 1970.  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty 13A (Field Artillery Basic).  He served in the Republic of Vietnam from 7 April 1971 through 19 July 1971.  The highest rank/grade he attained while serving on active duty was private first class (PFC)/E-3.

3.  His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows in:

	a.  item 38 (Record of Assignments), while in Vietnam he was assigned as a cannoneer to the following units within the 1st Brigade, 5th Infantry Division (Mechanized):

		(1)  Headquarters and Headquarters Battery, 5th Battalion, 4th Artillery Regiment from 24 to 25 April 1971;

		(2)  B Battery, 5th Battalion, 4th Artillery Regiment from 26 April to 8 July 1971; and

		(3)  Headquarters and Headquarters Company from 9 to 19 July 1971.

	b.  item 38, he had conduct and efficiency ratings of "excellent" for all of his assignments.

	c.  item 41 (Awards and Decorations), no indication that he was awarded the Bronze Star Medal.

4.  On 10 September 1971, he was discharged with an honorable characterization of service.  The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time of his discharge shows he was awarded or authorized the:

* National Defense Service Medal
* Vietnam Service Medal
* Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16)

5.  His record is void of any evidence and he has not provided any evidence showing that he completed installation-level mine sweeping training or that he was recommended for or awarded the Bronze Star Medal.

6.  Review of the Awards and Decorations Computer-Assisted Retrieval System, an index of general orders issued during the Vietnam era between 1965 and 1973 maintained by the Military Awards Branch of the U.S. Army Human Resources Command, failed to reveal any orders that show he was awarded the Bronze Star Medal or any additional awards or decorations.

7.  There is no evidence of any disciplinary actions or a commander's disqualification that would have precluded him from being recommended for or awarded the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.

8.  References:

	a.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards), paragraph 2-13, contains the regulatory guidance on the Vietnam Service Medal.  It 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 the following two campaigns took place during his period of service in the Republic of Vietnam:

* Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase VII
* Consolidation I

	b.  Department of the Army General Orders (DAGO) Number 42, dated 1972, announced award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation to the applicant's unit for actions during the period 8 February to 30 April 1971.

	c.  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.

	d.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 states the Bronze Star Medal is awarded in time of war for heroism and for meritorious achievement or service, not involving participation in aerial flight, in connection with military operations against an armed enemy, or while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party.  As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required.

9.  Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1130 provides the legal authority for consideration of proposals for decorations not previously submitted in timely fashion.  It allows, in effect, that upon the request of a Member of Congress, the Secretary concerned shall review a proposal for the award or presentation of a decoration (or the upgrading of a decoration), either for an individual or a unit, that is not otherwise authorized to be presented or awarded due to limitations established by law or policy for timely submission of a recommendation for such award or presentation.  Based upon such review, the Secretary shall make a determination as to the merits of approving the award or presentation of the decoration.

10.  The request, with a DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award), must be submitted through a Member of Congress to the Secretary of the Army at the following agency:  Commander, U.S. Army Human Resources Command, ATTN: AHRC-PDP-A, 1600 Spearhead Division Avenue, Fort Knox, KY 40122.  The applicant's unit must be clearly identified, along with the period of assignment and the award being recommended.  A narrative of the actions or period for which recognition is being requested must accompany the DA Form 638.  Requests for consideration of awards should be supported by sworn affidavits, eyewitness statements, certificates, and related documents.  Corroborating evidence is best provided by commanders, leaders and fellow Soldiers who had personal knowledge of the circumstances and events relative to the request.  The burden and costs for researching and assembling documentation to support approval of requested awards and decorations rest with the requestor.

11.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), in effect at the time, established the standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214.  In pertinent part, it stated that installation-level training courses which were successfully completed by enlisted personnel during the period covered by the DD Form 214 would be entered in item 25.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contentions were carefully considered and determined to have partial merit.

2.  The applicant contends that he deserves to be awarded the Bronze Star Medal for meritorious service during his tour of duty in the Republic of Vietnam.  However, there is no evidence that shows he was either recommended for or awarded the Bronze Star Medal.  Therefore, he is not entitled to correction of his DD Form 214 to show award of the Bronze Star Medal.
3.  While the available evidence is insufficient for awarding the applicant a Bronze Star Medal, this in no way affects the applicant's right to pursue his claim for the Bronze Star Medal by submitting a request through his Member of Congress under the provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code section 1130.

4.  Records show he participated in two campaigns while serving in the Republic of Vietnam.  Therefore, he is entitled to award of the Vietnam Service Medal with two bronze service stars and correction of his DD Form 214 to show this service medal.

5.  DAGOs awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation to the applicant's units for actions during his period of assignment; therefore, he is entitled to correction of his DD Form 214 to show this unit award.

6.  The evidence of record shows the applicant completed a period of honorable service wherein he received all "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings with no convictions by a court-martial.  Additionally, there is no evidence he was disqualified by his chain of command from receiving the Army Good Conduct Medal.  Therefore, it would be appropriate at this time to award him the Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award) for the period 20 July 1970 through 10 September 1971 and to correct his DD Form 214 to show this award.

7.  His record is void of any evidence and he has not provided any evidence showing that he completed installation-level mine sweeping training.  Therefore, he is not eligible to have this training annotated on his 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 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.  awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award) for the period 20 July 1970 through 10 September 1971;

	b.  deleting the Vietnam Service Medal from his DD Form 214; and

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

* Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award)
* Vietnam Service Medal with 2 bronze service stars
* Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation

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 correcting his DD Form 214 to show award of the Bronze Star Medal or the completion of mine sweeping training.  



      _______ _   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)                                         AR20140014192





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140014192



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1