IN THE CASE OF:    

		BOARD DATE:  18 August 2015	

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20150000960


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 reconsideration of the previous Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) decision as promulgated in Docket Number AR20140008115 on 16 December 2014.  

2.  Specifically, the applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show in:

* block 23a (Specialty Number and Title), his military occupational specialty (MOS) as "Field Illumination Crew Chief" 
* block 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized), he was awarded the Bronze Star Medal
* block 25 (Education and Training Completed), he graduated from the Noncommissioned Officer (NCO) Academy at Fort Sill, Oklahoma

3.  The applicant states:

   a.  He can't express enough his sadness and disappointment at the Board's refusal to correct his military record.  He has never been so insulted in his entire life and this, by his own country and branch of service, which he has served with all of his heart and strength.  

   b.  The Board concluded that there was no evidence or record of his attendance and graduation from the NCO Academy at Fort Sill, Oklahoma.  He finds this impossible to believe, since he attended this academy with approximately 25 other guys for a total of about 5 months. He questions how the Board reasons he was able to attain the rank/grade of sergeant (SGT)/E-5 in just 9 months, while stationed at a stateside installation?

   c.  Back at that time, during the Vietnam War, NCO Academy graduates were nick-named "shake 'n' bakes," because of the speed in which they made rank.  Graduates were promoted to SGT; however, it was also understood that they would go straight to Vietnam.  Apparently, the Board did not dig deep enough or did not spend enough time checking all of the records, including those records at Fort Sill.

   d.  He understands the Board's decisions with respect to the Bronze Star Medal because he did not see it but was told he would be awarded it.  However, the Board cannot tell him he did not attain the rank of SGT upon his graduation from the NCO Academy.  This is something that was very challenging and not everyone had the ability to complete.  At graduation, he was voted most field expedient.

4.  In a separate attached statement the applicant contends:

   a.  He entered military service on 10 March 1970 at Fort Dix, New Jersey.  After completing basic training, he was promoted to the rank/grade of private (PV2)/E-2 and was ordered Fort Sill, Oklahoma, for advanced individual training (AIT).  When he arrived at Fort Sill, he was invited to attend an optional 2-week Leadership Preparation School before the beginning of his AIT class.  He graduated at the top of his class and was promoted to the rank/grade of private first class (PFC)/E-3.

   b.  When his AIT class began, he was selected to be the trainee "Assistant Chief of Firing Battery"; he was responsible for drilling 200 men and overseeing their formation.  When this 8-week period was over, he was the only one who was given orders to attend the Infrared Field Illumination Crew Chief Course at the NCO Academy and he was promoted to the rank/grade of corporal (CPL)/
E-4.  After completing 5 months of instruction at the NCO Academy, he was promoted to SGT and was voted "most field expedient" by the training staff.  He was then ordered to Vietnam.

   c.  When he arrived in Vietnam, he was sent to Da Nang to work with Battery G, 29th Artillery Regiment, and Headquarters and Headquarters Battery (HHB), 1st Battalion, 44th Artillery Regiment.  They were very instrumental in ending the siege at Khe Sanh.  His battery was attached to and worked closely with, the 1st Division of the U.S. Marine Corps.

   d.  After 2 weeks, his captain gave him a job that had no MOS.  He was placed in charge of all of the infrared searchlight repairs in Military Region One, from the demilitarized zone all the way down to Chu Lai.  The job was a new position that was created because of a need to have someone who could repair infrared searchlights in country, instead of shipping them back to the United States, which would usually take up to 3 months.  He was trained and performed his duties well, which also included many dangerous searchlight installations and repairs in Military Region One.  He often worked with helicopters, which would deliver the searchlights while he was strapped to the top of tall towers so he would not be blown away.  He was fearless in the performance of his duties.  He was shot at by snipers, but fortunately was never hit.  He was also a frequent advisor to the commander and he was the one that was selected to brief him about infrared searchlights and their placements when he first came into the battery.

   e.  Just before leaving Vietnam, his commander told him he would receive the Bronze Star Medal for meritorious service.  When he was discharged, he did not see the Bronze Star Medal on his DD Form 214 and he also noticed that his specialty was not correct and his DD Form 214 did not list his attendance or graduation from the NCO Academy.  His MOS was listed as "crewman" instead of "crew chief."

5.  The applicant provides no additional evidence.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records that were summarized by the ABCMR in the previous consideration of the applicant's case in Docket Number AR20140008115 on 16 December 2014.

2.  The applicant provides a statement that was not previously considered and now warrants consideration by the Board.

3.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 10 March 1970.  He entered active duty and completed basic training at Fort Dix, New Jersey.

4.  He was ordered to Fort Sill, Oklahoma, for AIT in MOS 13A (Field Artillery Basic).  He arrived at Fort Sill on or about 18 May 1970.

5.  Special Orders Number 118 issued by Headquarters, U.S. Army Training Center, Field Artillery (USATC FA), Fort Sill, Oklahoma, on 26 May 1970, ordered him to proceed on temporary duty to the Fort Sill Academy USATC FA, for the purpose of attending Leadership Course 43/70 prior to the commencement of his AIT.  The stated reporting date was 18 May 1970 and the period was approximately 14 days. 

6.  Item 33 (Appointments and Reductions) of his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows he was promoted to the rank/grade of PV2/E-2 on 28 May 1970.

7.  He completed his AIT and was awarded MOS 13A.

8.  Special Orders Number 161 issued by Headquarters, USATC FA, Fort Sill, Oklahoma on 23 July 1970 assigned him to Headquarters and Service Battery (Student), Combat Leader Battalion, U.S. Army Field Artillery School, effective  12 September 1970, for the purpose of attending the Combat Leaders Program in MOS 17E4O (Field Illumination Crewman), Class 2-71.

9.  Item 33 of his DA Form 20 shows he was promoted to the rank/grade of PFC/E-3 on 24 July 1970 and to the rank/grade of specialist four (SP4)/E-4 on 
21 September 1970.

10.  His record contains a Fort Sill (FS) Form 97-R (Certificate of Proficiency) that shows he satisfactorily completed Phase 1 of the Field Illumination Crewman Skill Development Base (SDB) Course, Class Number 2-71, held at the U.S. Army Field Artillery School, Fort Sill, Oklahoma, during the period 
21 September through 25 November 1970.

11.  Item 27 (Military Education) of his DA Form 20 shows he completed the Field Illumination Crewman SDB Course in MOS 17E4O conducted by the U.S. Army Field Artillery School in 1970.

12.  Special Orders Number 322 issued by Headquarters, U.S. Army Field Artillery School Brigade, Fort Sill, Oklahoma on 24 November 1970 awarded MOS 17E2O as his primary MOS, following his successful completion of the academic phase of SDB training in MOS 17E4O, effective  25 November 1970.  These orders show his rank/grade as SP4/E-4. 

13.  Special Orders Number 209 issued by Headquarters, 3rd Battalion (Target Acquisition), 26th Artillery Regiment, Fort Sill, Oklahoma on 11 December 1970 show he was promoted to the rank/grade of SGT/E-5, effective 11 December 1970.

14.  Special Orders Number 339 issued by Headquarters, U.S. Army Field Artillery School Brigade, Fort Sill, Oklahoma on 11 December 1970 amended Special Orders Number 322 by changing his rank to read "SGT" and his primary MOS to read "17E4O."

15.  Item 31 (Foreign Service) of his DA Form 20 shows he served in the Republic of Vietnam from 28 January 1971 through on or about 3 November 1971.  During this period, he was assigned to:

* Battery G (Searchlight (SLT)), 29th Artillery Regiment, as a section leader in MOS 17E4O from on or about 4 February 1971 through on or about 
27 September 1971
* HHB, 1st Battalion, 44th Artillery Regiment, as a section leader in MOS 17E4O from on or about 28 September 1971 through on or about             
3 November 1971

16.  He was honorably released from active duty on 4 November 1971 after completing 1 year, 7 months, and 25 days of total active service, including          9 months and 6 days of foreign service in the U.S. Army Pacific theater of operations (Vietnam).  His DD Form 214 shows in:

	a.  block 23a, the entry "17E4C FA ILLUM CRMN," meaning at the time of his separation, he was a qualified Field Illumination Crewman in MOS 17E4 with specialized training as a Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical NCO (skill qualification identifier (SQI) "C");

	b.  block 24, he was awarded or authorized the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal, and the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16);

	c.  block 25, the entry "FA ILLUM CRMN SDB  9 WEEKS," meaning he was a graduate of the Field Illumination Crewman SDB Course; and 

	d.  block 30, he served in the Republic of Vietnam from 28 January 1971 through 3 November 1971.

17.  His record is void of documentation that shows he was recommended for or awarded the Bronze Star Medal.

18.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning individual and unit military awards.  It provides that 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.

19.  Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1130, provides the legal authority for consideration of proposals for decorations not previously submitted in a timely fashion.  Upon the request of a Member of Congress, the Secretary concerned shall review a proposal for the award of or upgrading of a decoration.  Based upon such review, the Secretary shall determine the merits of approving the award.

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

21.  Extracts from Educating Noncommissioned Officers and Shake and Bake: The True Story of the Noncommissioned Officer Candidate Course, both written by Command Sergeant Major Daniel K. Elder (Retired), the Army's preeminent NCO historian, provides pertinent background information related to the SDB Program and the NCO Candidate Course.

As the war in Vietnam progressed, the attrition of combat, the 12-month tour limit in Vietnam, separations of senior NCOs, and the 25-month stateside stabilization policy began to take its toll on the ranks of enlisted leaders to the point of crisis.  Without a call up of the Reserve forces, Vietnam became the Regular Army's war, fought by junior leaders.  The Army was faced with sending career NCOs back into action sooner or filling the ranks with the most senior of its junior enlisted Soldiers.  Field commanders were challenged with understaffed vacancies at base camps, filling various key leadership positions, and providing for replacements.  Older and more experienced NCOs, some World War II veterans, were strained by the physical requirements of the methods of jungle fighting.  The Army was quickly running out of NCOs in the combat specialties.
In order to meet these unprecedented requirements for NCO leaders, the Army developed a solution called the SDB Program, based on the proven Officer Candidate Course where an enlisted man could attend basic training and AIT, and if recommended or applied for, filled out an application and attended OCS. The thought by some was that the same could be done for NCOs.  If a carefully selected Soldier could be given 23 weeks of intensive training that would qualify him to lead a platoon, then others could be trained to lead squads and fire teams in the same amount of time.  From this seed the NCO Candidate Course was born.  Potential candidates were selected from groups of initial entry soldiers who demonstrated leadership potential, had a security clearance of confidential, and an infantry score of 100 or more.  Those selected to attend the NCO Candidate Course were immediately promoted to CPL and later promoted to SGT upon graduation from phase one.  The select few who graduated with honors were promoted to staff sergeant (SSG).
  
The NCO Candidate Course was designed to maximize the 2-year tour of the enlisted draftee.  The Army Chief of Staff approved the concept on 22 June 1967, and the first course began at Fort Benning, Georgia on 5 September 1967.  By combining the amount of time it took to attend basic training and AIT, including leave and travel time, and then add a 
12-month tour in Vietnam, the developers settled on a 21-22 week course.  The NCO Candidate Course was divided into two phases.  Phase I was 12 weeks of intensive, hands-on training, broken down into three basic phases.  For the Infantry NCO, the course included tasks such as physical training, hand-to-hand combat, weapons, first aid, map reading, communications, and indirect fire.  Vietnam veterans or Rangers taught many of the classes, but the cadre of the first course was commissioned officers.  The second basic phase focused on instruction of fire team, squad and platoon tactics.  Though over 300 hours of instruction was given, 80-percent was conducted in the field.  The final basic phase was a "dress rehearsal for Vietnam," a full week of patrols, ambush, defensive perimeters, and navigation.  Twice daily the Vietnam-schooled Rangers critiqued the candidates and all training was conducted tactically.

Throughout the 12-weeks of training, leadership was instilled in all 
that the students would do.  A student chain of command was set 
up and "Tactical NCOs" supervised the daily performance of the candidates.  By the time the students successfully completed 



Phase I, they were promoted to SGT or SSG and shipped off to conduct a 9-10 week practical application of their leadership skills by serving as assistant leaders in a training center or unit.  This gave the candidate the opportunity to gain more confidence in leading soldiers.  As with many programs of its time, the NCO Candidate Course was originally developed to meet the needs of the combat arms.  With the success of the course, it was extended to other career fields, and the program became known as the SDB Program.  The Armored School at Fort Knox began its NCO Candidate Course on 5 December 1967.  Additionally, NCO Candidate Courses were instituted at Fort Sill, Fort Leonard Wood, and Fort Bliss.

22.  Army Regulation 350-27 (Skill Development Base), in effect at the time, provided guidance and procedures to the Army for the management of the SDB.  It set forth the policies, objectives, definitions, and responsibilities to be followed in keeping the SDB current and responsive to the needs of the Army.  The objective of the SDB was to provide additional advanced training for selected AIT graduates and other active duty permanent party personnel, grade E-4 and below, in order that they may perform in the middle enlisted grades.  Paragraph 2-2 (Sub-Programs with the SDB) provided that there were three distinct and separate sub-programs of the SDB, the first being the NCO Candidate Course.

23.  The applicant's records contain numerous documents that address his attendance at the Field Illumination Crewman SDB Course in 1970.  Each of these documents suggest the course was held under the auspices of the U.S. Army Field Artillery School.  None contain language that suggests the course was conducted under the auspices of the NCO Academy.

24.  Various Army historical websites show the 17E4O Field Illumination Crewman SDB Course was one of five NCO Candidate Courses conducted at Fort Sill, Oklahoma in 1970.

25.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), in effect at the time, established uniform administrative procedures and separation forms to be used in connection with the separation of military personnel.  It prescribed the separation documents prepared for Soldiers upon retirement, discharge, or release from active military service or control of the Army.  It established a standardized policy for the preparation of the DD Form 214.  Section III of the regulation in effect at the time provided instructions pertaining to preparation and distribution of the DD Form 214.



	a.  For block 23a, enter the PMOS code number and title.

	b.  For block 25, enter service schools, including major courses that were successfully completed, and military-sponsored courses completed in civilian schools and colleges for the period covered by the DD Form 214.  For enlisted personnel, enter installation training courses (qualification courses), military correspondence courses, and off-duty courses the enlisted person completed successfully during the period covered by the DD Form 214.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

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

* his MOS as "Field Illumination Crew Chief"
* he was awarded the Bronze Star Medal
* he was a graduate of the NCO Academy at Fort Sill

2.  The applicant's DD Form 214 shows that at the time of his separation, he was considered by the Army to be a qualified Field Illumination Crewman.  However, the recorded entry does not take into account his NCO rank and performance as a section leader.  Undoubtedly, he was qualified in his MOS.  Since he led Soldiers in combat, it would be appropriate to grant this portion of his request by correcting the entry in block 23a of his DD Form 214 to read "17E4C FIELD ILLUMINATION CREW CHIEF."

3.  The applicant contends his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show he graduated from the NCO Candidate Course at Fort Sill, Oklahoma.  The evidence of record shows he did, in fact, graduate from the Field Illumination Crewman SDB Course at Fort Sill and this course was one of five NCO Candidate Courses conducted at Fort Sill at the time.  This is further supported by his promotion to the rank of SGT upon his graduation, in keeping with the program's policy at the time.  The evidence supports his contention that he graduated from an NCO Candidate Course.

4.  The Field Illumination Crewman SDB Course is shown on his DD Form 214; however, it is not identified as an NCO Candidate Course and its entry does not identify where it was conducted.  The governing Army regulation does not provide specific guidance vis-à-vis the minimum data elements that should be recorded for entries in block 25.  However, these entries typically include the course title, duration in weeks, and the year the course was completed.  As a matter of equity, it would be appropriate to grant this portion of the requested relief by amending this entry in block 25 to show he completed the course in 1970, and to show the course was an NCO Candidate Course.
5.  Notwithstanding the language in paragraph 4 above, there is no provision in the governing Army regulation that requires the listing of the course location.  Therefore, there is no basis to amend the entry in block 25 to show the course was held at the NCO Academy at Fort Sill. 

6.  With respect to award of the Bronze Star Medal, the available records are void of any evidence and the applicant did not provide any evidence that shows he was previously recommended for or awarded this award.  The governing Army regulation states that for personal decorations, including the Bronze Star Medal, formal recommendation, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders is required.  In the absence of orders, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis for granting this portion of his request.

7.  While the available evidence is insufficient for awarding the applicant the Bronze Star Medal, this in no way affects his right to pursue his claim for this award by submitting a request through his Member of Congress under the provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1130.

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.

2.  With respect to the applicant's request for reconsideration, the Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant amendment of the ABCMR's decision in Docket Number AR20140008115 on 16 December 2014.    As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by:

* amending block 23a of his DD Form 214 by deleting the entry "17E4C FA ILLUM CRMN" and replacing it with the entry "17E4C FIELD ILLUMINATION CREW CHIEF"
* amending block 25 of his DD Form 214 by deleting the entry "FA ILLUM CRMN SDB  9 WEEKS" and  replacing it with the entry "FIELD ILLUMINATION CREWMAN SKILL DEVELOPMENT BASE COURSE,     9 WEEKS, 1970 (NCO CANDIDATE COURSE)" 

3.  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 amending block 25 of his DD Form 214 to show he graduated from the NCO Academy at Fort Sill, or that pertains to awarding him the Bronze Star Medal or correcting his DD Form 214 to show he was awarded the Bronze Star Medal.



      _______ _   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)                                         AR20140000610



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20150000960



11


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1