PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           15 NOVEMBER 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001061335

	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:

	Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright		Chairperson	
	Mr. Stanley Kelley		Member	
	Ms. Karen A. Heinz		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 his 1969 DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) should reflect award of the Army Good Conduct Medal, the Purple Heart, Combat Infantryman Badge, and a Presidential Unit Citation.  He also requests that his grade be corrected to show that he “permanently held the rank of sergeant” and that the county of his permanent address, reflected in item 31 on his DD Form 214, should be Bronx County, not Kings County.  The applicant also states that his 12 years of education should be “classified as mechanical not general.”  He states that his separation report “should be accurate in every detail.”  In support of his request he submits copies of orders extracted from his OMPF (Official Military Personnel File).

3.  Records available to the Board indicate the applicant entered active duty on 22 March 1967.  Enlistment documents indicate that he was a graduate of Sacred Heart Elementary School and a 1965 graduate of Manhattan Voc Tech (Vocation & Technical) High School.  He was assigned to Vietnam as an infantryman with the 2nd Battalion, 12th Infantry, in August 1967.  On 8 February 1968 he was wounded as a result of hostile action.  He was evacuated from Vietnam, via Japan, and ultimately assigned to Fort Carson, Colorado.  On 
10 January 1969 orders were issued promoting the applicant to the grade of E-5. The promotion orders specifically state that the applicant was being “APT[appointed]/PROMOTED to TEMP[temporary] GR[grade]” of sergeant effective 23 December 1968.  His conduct and efficiency ratings, throughout his military service, were excellent.  His records contain no evidence of any misconduct or disciplinary infractions.

4.  On 21 March 1969 the applicant was released from active duty with an honorable characterization of service in the temporary grade of sergeant.  Item 21 (Home of Record) and item 31 (Permanent Address after Transfer or Discharge) both indicate addresses (Sagamore Street and Stratford Avenue) located in “Kings” County, New York.  His separation report indicates that he was entitled to the National Defense Service Medal, Vietnam Service Medal with two Bronze Service Stars and the Vietnam Campaign Medal.  Item 30 (Remarks) indicates that the applicant completed “12 Years Education – General.”

5.  In 1980 a DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) was issued correcting the applicant’s 1969 DD Form 214 to show award of the “Vietnam Service Medal with/2 Bronze Service Stars, National Defense Service Medal” and the “Republic of Vietnam Campaign Ribbon with Device 1960.”  In 1993 a second DD Form 215 was issued correcting the applicant’s 1969 DD Form 214 to show several additional awards, including the Purple Heart, Valorous Unit Award and Combat Infantryman Badge. There is no indication the applicant was ever awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal or a Presidential Unit Citation.

6.  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.  Current practice requires that the commander provide written notice of nonfavorable consideration and permits the individual to respond.  There is no evidence in the applicant's official military personnel file that his commander ever disqualified him for award of the Good Conduct Medal.

7.  Information obtained from the Bronx County Historical Society confirms that both Sagamore Street and Stratford Avenue are located in Bronx County, not Kings County.  

8.  Army Regulation 600-200, in effect at the time, established the policies and provision for the promotions of enlisted soldiers.  It stated that temporary promotion to pay grades E-4 through E-6 could be made against periodic temporary promotion quota allocations.  Individuals who met certain eligibility requirements could be considered for these temporary promotion quota allocations and promoted by their respective promotion authorities.  These temporary promotions became permanent when a soldier reached a specific time in grade and time in service requirements.  Temporary promotions to pay grade E-5 did not become permanent promotions until the individual had at least 12 months time in grade and 5 years time in service.

9.  A review of Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) notes the applicant’s unit (2nd Battalion, 12th Infantry) was awarded a Presidential Unit Citation for actions on 21 March 1967.  To be entitled to permanent award of a unit decoration, an individual must have been assigned to the unit at the time of the award.

10.  Army Regulation 635-5, then in effect, which established the policies and provisions for the preparation and distribution of the DD Form 214, indicated that an individual’s “highest civilian education level attained” will be reflected as the first entry in the remarks section of an individual’s DD Form 214.  The information was taken from the individual’s DD Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record).  The applicant’s DA Form 20 indicates the applicant graduated from the Manhattan Voc Tech High School in Manhattan in 1965 and received a diploma.  No specific degree or area of study is reflected.  

11.  Army Regulation 635-5 also provides for the issuance of a new DD Form 214 when a third DD Form 215 is required to correct additional information on the subject DD Form 214.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Board notes that the applicant’s records have previously been corrected to reflect award of several decorations, including the Purple Heart and Combat Infantryman Badge.  As such, no additional action is required by the Board on that portion of his request.

2.  The evidence confirms that the applicant lived in Bronx County, New York, not Kings County, at the time of his enlistment and following his separation from active duty.  Items 21 and 31 on his 1969 DD Form 214 should be corrected accordingly.

3.  The applicant completed a qualifying period of service for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal on 21 March 1969 when he was released from active duty with an honorable characterization of service.  The Board notes that there is no evidence in available records which would serve as a basis to deny the applicant an award of the Good Conduct Medal for the period 22 March 1967 through 
22 March 1969.  As such, the applicant should be awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal and his records corrected accordingly.

4.  The Board notes that in order to correct the applicant’s 1969 DD Form 214 to reflect the above corrections, a third DD Form 215 would be needed.  As such, the Board concludes that it would be appropriate, and in accordance with the provisions of Army Regulation 635-5, to issue the applicant a new DD Form 214 incorporating the information on his original separation report with the corrections made by this Board and those reflected on the 1980 and 1993 DD Forms 215.

5.  There is no evidence, nor has the applicant provided any, that he was issued a “mechanical” degree upon graduation from the Manhattan Voc Tech High School in 1965 and as such there is no basis to change the entry in item 30 of his DD Form 214.

6.  While the applicant’s unit was awarded a Presidential Unit Citation for actions on 21 March 1967, the applicant did not arrive in the unit until August 1967 and as such is not entitled to the Presidential Unit Citation.

7.  The Board concludes that the applicant’s separation in the temporary rank of sergeant was correct.  The applicant’s records confirm that his promotion to pay grade E-5 (sergeant) was a temporary promotion.  The promotion would not have become permanent until the applicant had completed 5 years of military service.  

8.  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:

a.  by awarding the individual concerned the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 22 March 1967 through 21 March 1969;

b.  by showing that he resided in Bronx County, not Kings County at the time of his entry on active duty (item 21) and after his separation (item 31); and

c.  by issuing him a new DD Form 214 which incorporates the above corrections as well as the information on the DD Forms 215 issued in 1980 and 1993.

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

BOARD VOTE:  

__INW __  ___KS __  __KAH __  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		___Irene N. Wheelwright___
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001061335	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20011115	
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.	110.00	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.