PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:  29 March 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999029209

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.  

	Mr. Vic Whitney		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Robert G. Hinkle		Chairperson	
	Mr. James P. Stueve		Member	
	Mr. Mark D. Manning		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests that his records be corrected to show award of the Bronze Star Medal and the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB).  He submits a copy of a citation and certificate for the Bronze Star Medal in support of his application.

3.  The applicant states that these awards are missing from his DD Form 214 (report of separation).

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he was inducted and entered active duty on 26 June 1968.  He completed infantry training and was assigned to Vietnam from February 1969 to February 1970.  He was promoted to grade E-4 effective 6 July 1969.

5.  Effective 5 February 1970 he was separated from active duty under honorable conditions as an overseas returnee and transferred to the USAR.  His DD Form 214 shows that he had 1 year, 7 months, and 10 days creditable service and no lost time.  His authorized awards include the Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) and the Vietnam Service Medal.  Neither the Bronze Star Medal nor the CIB are listed.

6.  The applicant’s records contain a copy of general order 523 which awarded the applicant the ARCOM for meritorious service for the period February 1969 to February 1970.  The record also contain a copy of special order 72 which awarded him the CIB and special order 206 which awarded him the sharpshooter marksmanship badge with rifle bar.

7.  Although the applicant had all excellent conduct and efficiency ratings and no record of indiscipline, there is no record of an award of the Good Conduct Medal.

8.  Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time, provided the policy for awards. It provided that the Bronze Star Medal was awarded in time of war for heroism and for meritorious achievement or service.  As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required.  Recommendations must be made within 2 years of the event or period of service and the award must be made within 3 years.  There are regulatory provisions for lost recommendations but not for late recommendations, reconsideration, nor for upgrading to a more prestigious award.  Additionally, only one award for meritorious service may be approved for the same time period.

9.  Additionally, the regulation provided for the addition of service stars to the Vietnam Service Medal for participation in each named campaign.  A bronze service star is authorized for each campaign.

10.  The regulation also provides that the Good Conduct Medal is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency and fidelity during a qualifying 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.  A record of punishment is not automatically disqualifying.  However, at that time, a single efficiency rating of less than excellent was disqualifying.  Although there is no automatic entitlement to the Good Conduct Medal, disqualification must be justified.  Current practice requires that the commander provide written notice of nonfavorable consideration and permits the individual to respond.  At that time, nonfavorable consideration was normally noted on the DA Form 20.

11.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 provides the policy for unit decorations and campaign participation.  The pamphlet notes that the applicant’s unit was awarded the Valorous Unit Award, the Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm and the Vietnam Civil Action Honor Medal.  Additionally, it shows that he was assigned to units in Vietnam which were credited with participation in four named campaigns.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant is entitled to have his records corrected to show that he was awarded the CIB, the Good Conduct Medal, the sharpshooter marksmanship badge with rifle bar, the Valorous Unit Award, four bronze service stars for the Vietnam Service Medal, the Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm and the Vietnam Civil Action Honor Medal.

2.  Notwithstanding the applicant provided copies of a Bronze Star Medal citation and certificate, there are no orders for the award and the ARCOM was awarded for the same time period.

3.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was awarded the CIB, the Good Conduct Medal, the sharpshooter marksmanship badge with rifle bar, the Valorous Unit Award, four bronze service stars for the Vietnam Service Medal, the Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm and the Vietnam Civil Action Honor Medal.

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

__RH___  ___JS__  __MM___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		___Robert G. Hinkle___
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999029209	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20000329	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.		
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.