PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           17 May 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000037090

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Calvin M. Fowler		Chairperson	
	Mr. Fred Eichorn		Member	
	Mr. Raymond J. Wagner		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 he was awarded the Presidential Unit Citation (PUC) (Navy).

3.  The applicant states that he was assigned to the 4th Battalion, 503d Infantry, 173d Airborne Brigade at the time it was awarded the PUC (Navy) for Task Force Healy.  He provides a page from a newsletter describing the action for which Task Force Healy was awarded the PUC (Navy) for extraordinary heroism and outstanding performances of duty against the enemy from 7 October to               4 December 1966.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 2 September 1964.  He was assigned to Vietnam on 25 June 1966 where he performed duties as a company aid man with Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 4th Battalion (Airborne) 503d Infantry.  On 26 December 1966 he was reassigned to the U. S. Army Vietnam Patient Casualty Company.  He was released from active duty on 6 June 1967 after completing 2 years, 9 months and 5 days of creditable active service wit no lost time.  His DA Form 20, Personnel Qualification Record shows his conduct and efficiency were always rated as “excellent” except for three “good (academic)” efficiency ratings while at the basic airborne training, special forces aid man (Fort Sam Houston, TX) and special forces aid man (Fort Bragg, NC) courses.

5.  The applicant subsequently reenlisted in the Regular Army on 19 February 1969.  He was awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal (first award) on General Orders 176 dated 6 June 1975, Headquarters, 193d Infantry Brigade (Canal Zone) for the period 1 May 1972 through 30 April 1975.  He was honorably discharged on 16 June 1976.

6.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 shows that the 4th Battalion, 503d Infantry was awarded the PUC (Navy) for the period 7 October through               
4 December 1966.

7.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides policy and criteria concerning individual military decorations.  It provides that the Army Good Conduct Medal is 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.  At the time, a soldier’s conduct and efficiency ratings must have been rated as “excellent” for the entire period of qualifying service except that a service school efficiency rating based upon academic proficiency of at least “good” rendered subsequent to 22 November 1955 was not disqualifying.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record shows the applicant was assigned to the 4th Battalion, 503d Infantry during a period of time the unit was awarded the Presidential Unit Citation (Navy).

2.  The evidence of record also shows that the applicant was eligible for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 2 September 1964 through 6 June 1967.  Therefore, he should have been awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal (second award) for the period 1 May 1972 through 30 April 1975.

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 awarding the applicant the Army Good Conduct Medal (first award) for the period 2 September 1964 through 6 June 1967.

2.  That the Army Good Conduct Medal (first award) and the Presidential Unit Citation (Navy) be added to the applicant’s DD Form 214 for the period ending     6 June 1967.

3.  That General Orders 176 dated 6 June 1975, Headquarters 193d Infantry Brigade (Canal Zone) awarding the applicant the Army Good Conduct Medal (first award) for the period 1 May 1972 through 30 April 1975 be revoked and he be awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal (second award) for the period 1 May 1972 through 30 April 1975.

4.  That the applicant’s DD Form 214 for the period ending 16 June 1976 be amended to delete the Army Good Conduct Medal and to add the Army Good Conduct Medal (second award) and the Presidential Unit Citation (Navy).

BOARD VOTE:  

__cmf___  ___fe___  __rjw___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

			Calvin M. Fowler
		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000037090	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000517	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(GRANT)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107.0031	
2.	107.0056	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.