PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:            5 October 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000038590

	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	
	MS. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Shirley Powell		Chairperson	
	Jaime Perez		Member	
	Elzey J. Arledge		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, in effect, that the records of her spouse, a deceased former servicemember, be corrected to reflect that he served two tours of duty in Vietnam, that his 4th award of the Army Good Conduct Medal be added to his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record), and that any other awards he may be entitled to be added to his records.  In support of her request she submits a copy of her spouse’s DA Form 20, which she refers to as a “401 file.”  She states that she knows her spouse served two tours of duty in Vietnam but his DA Form 20 reflects only one tour.  She notes that she believes his second tour was between 1963 and 1965.  She also notes that information regarding her spouse’s service, in item 38 (records of assignment) on the DA Form 20 ceases in 1970 although her husband did not retire until 1973.  The applicant also states that her spouse may have been awarded other decorations that are not reflected in his records.

3.  Records available to the Board indicate the former servicemember entered active duty in January 1953 and served continuously until his retirement for length of service in February 1973.  

4.  His records confirm, through awards (a Bronze Star Medal, Combat Infantryman Badge, and an Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal) and a certificate of recognition (for service in Laos), that he was in Laos between March 1962 and September 1962 while he was assigned as a Radio Operator with the 1st Special Forces Group in Okinawa.  Item 31 (foreign service) on his DA Form 20 indicates he was also in Vietnam between November 1963 and May 1964 while assigned to the 5th Special Forces Group at Fort Bragg, North Carolina.  Item 39 (campaigns) on his DA Form 20 credit him with participation in one designated campaign period associated with the Vietnam War (the Vietnam Advisory Campaign which covered the period 15 March 1962 through 7 March 1965).  His DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) issued in November 1967, upon his discharge for the purpose of immediate reenlistment, incorrectly indicates he was awarded the Vietnam Service Medal.

5.  He was assigned to Korea between January 1968 and January 1969 and awarded an Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal.  That award is reflected on his 1970 DD Form 214.

6.  The former servicemember’s last permanent duty assignment was in Germany.  In November 1972 he departed Germany and was processed for retirement at Fort Bragg, North Carolina.  He was released from active duty on 28 February 1973 and his name was placed on the retired rolls the following day. His final DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer of Discharge) captured information about the servicemember’s service between 
23 February 1970 (his last reenlistment) and 28 February 1973.  The DD Form 214 indicates entitlement to a 4th Army Good Conduct Medal although there are no orders confirming the award in the former servicemember’s file.  An original DA Form 20, contained in the former servicemember’s file does contain typed entries in item 38 regarding the servicemember’s departure from Germany and a final entry indicating transfer to the retired rolls in 1973.  A handwritten entry in item 41 (awards and decorations) makes reference to his 4th award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.

7.  The former servicemember was awarded an Army Commendation Medal in February 1973 by his organization in Germany although the award was never recorded on his 1973 DD Form 214

8.  The former servicemember was awarded Army Good Conduct Medals for periods ending on 25 January 1956, 5 December 1960, 1 February 1964 and his 4th award which was not entered with an ending date in his record.  Item 44 (lost time) on the DA Form 20 indicates the former service member was absent without leave (AWOL) for 16 days in March 1964 and for 11 days in March 1969.

9.  Army Regulation 640-2-1 establishes the policies and provisions for the maintenance of Army military personnel files.  The DA Form 20 used during the former servicemember’s period of military service, and subsequently replaced by the DA Form 2-1 (personnel qualification record), are management tools used by military commanders and personnel manager to effectively manage a soldier’s career.  The forms are not intended to be a historical record of a soldier’s career nor intended for use outside, or beyond, an individual’s military service.

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 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.  Although there is no automatic entitlement to the Good Conduct Medal, disqualification must be justified.  

11.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 also states that the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (AFEM) is awarded to soldiers serving in designated areas during designated period.  Awards were authorized for service in Laos between 19 April 1961 and 7 October 1962 and for service in Vietnam between 1 July 1958 and 
3 July 1965.  The Vietnam Service Medal was awarded for service in Vietnam between 3 July 1965 and 28 March 1978 and the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960) was awarded for service in Vietnam between 1 March 1961 and 28 March 1973.  Bronze service stars are worn on the AFEM and Vietnam Service Medal to denote participation in designated campaign periods.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s primary concern appears to be with information contained, or not contained, on her spouse’s DA Form 20.  That form was never intended to be a historical record of an individual’s career and was merely utilized by military personnel in the management of a soldier’s career while that soldier was in an active status.  Correcting unclear information or adding entries years after the fact serves no useful military purpose and as such the Board contends that the lack of information, or unclear information on the form does not indicate or create an error or injustice in an individual’s records and as such does not require correction by the Board.

2.  There is no evidence to support a conclusion that the former member served two tours of duty in Vietnam.  The evidence in available records does confirm that the former servicemember was deployed to Laos between March 1962 and September 1962 while assigned to a unit in Okinawa and he was likely deployed to Vietnam between November 1963 and May 1964 while assigned to a unit at Fort Bragg.  There is no indication he was ever actually “assigned” to a unit in Vietnam.  Based on his deployment to Laos and Vietnam, however, he is entitled to a total of three awards of the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (Laos, Vietnam and Korea).  He is also entitled to a bronze service star on his AFEM denoting his participation in the Vietnam Advisory Campaign.

3.  There is, however, no evidence the applicant served in Vietnam after 3 July 1965 and as such is not entitled to the Vietnam Service Medal currently reflected on his separation document.

4.  The evidence indicates the former servicemember was awarded four Army Good Conduct Medals during his 20 years of active Federal service.  While there is no evidence which confirms why the ending dates of his Good Conduct Medals are inconsistent with the usual three year award increments the Board had consistently declined to question the judgement of commanders on the ground at the time an individual was awarded decorations which would have been within that commander’s jurisdiction.  Additionally, the Board concludes that his two periods of AWOL would have served as justification to deny award of the Good Conduct Medal during the three-year period that encompassed the AWOL time.  As such the Board concludes that the former servicemember’s four awards of the Army Good Conduct Medal were properly awarded and there is no basis to award him any additional awards.

5.  The former servicemember was also awarded an Army Commendation Medal that was not recorded on his final (1973) DD Form 214.

6.  In view of the foregoing, the former servicemember’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:

	a.  by deleting the Vietnam Service Medal from his DD Form 214;

b.  by showing that the individual concerned is entitled to three awards of the AFEM and a bronze service star denoting participation in the Vietnam Advisory Campaign; and

c.  by showing that he was awarded an Army Commendation Medal.

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

BOARD VOTE:  

__eja___  ___jp___  ___sp___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000038590	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20001005	
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.	107.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.