PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            16 September 2003                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR2003087636

	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	
	Mr. William Blakely		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		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 separation document (DD Form 214) be corrected to list his correct date of induction and to add the Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) to the list of authorized awards.

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that his DD Form 214 contains an incorrect induction date in Item 10c (Induction Date), and does not include an ARCOM he earned in Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized).  In support of his application, he submits a copy of his 4 March 1970 DD Form 214, his Record of Induction
(DD Form 47), and his Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20).

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he was inducted into the Army of the United States for two years on 13 March 1968.  He was trained in served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 82C (Artillery Surveyor) and he continuously served on active duty for 1 year, 11 months, and 22 days until being honorably separated on 4 March 1970.

5.  The applicant’s DA Form 20 shows that the highest rank he attained while serving on active duty was specialist four/E-4 (SP4/E-4).  It also confirms he served in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) from 5 April 1969 to 5 March 1970, and that he earned the following awards during his active duty tenure: National Defense Service Medal (NDSM); Vietnam Service Medal (VSM); and 
RVN Campaign Medal with 60 Device.  It also confirms that he received “Excellent” conduct and efficiency ratings at all of his active duty assignments.  

6.  The applicant’s Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) contains a copy of a DD Form 47 and Acknowledgement of Service Obligation (3rd Form 49-R) which confirm that he was inducted into the Army on 13 March 1968.  The MPRJ is void of any orders or documents showing that he was ever recommended for or awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM), or of any derogatory information or a disqualification by any of the active duty unit commanders for whom he served that would disqualify him from receiving this award.  

7.  The DD Form 214 issued to the applicant on the date of his separation lists the date of his induction as 13 March 1969 in Item 10c, and it does not include the ARCOM as an authorized award in Item 24.  

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes the policy and procedures for the Army’s awards program.  Paragraph 2-13 of the awards regulation contains guidance on awarding the VSM.  It states, in pertinent part, that a bronze service star is authorized with this award for each campaign a member participated in while serving in the RVN.  

9.  Table B-1 of the awards regulation contains a list of all campaigns, service requirements, and inscriptions for streamers.  It confirms that the applicant was credited with participation in the following three campaigns based on his tenure of assignment in the RVN:  TET Counteroffensive 1969; Vietnam Summer-Fall 1969; and Vietnam Winter-Spring 1970. 

10.  Paragraph 3-16 of the awards regulation contains guidance on awarding the ARCOM.  It states, in pertinent part, that it is awarded to any member who distinguished himself or herself by heroism, meritorious achievement or meritorious service.  As with all personal decorations, award of the ARCOM requires a formal recommendation being processed through the chain of command, approval by the proper awards authority, and announced in orders.

11.  Chapter 4 of the same regulation prescribes the policy for award of the AGCM.  It states, in pertinent part, that it is authorized for each 3 years of qualifying honorable service completed on or after 27 August 1940.  However, for the first award only, a period of more than one year is a qualifying period if the award is issued at the termination of a period of Federal service.  While there is no automatic entitlement to the AGCM, disqualification must be justified.  

12.  Department of the Army General Order Number 8, dated 1974, authorized the award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation to all personnel assigned to United States Army Vietnam or Military Assistance Command Vietnam and its subordinate units from 8 February 1962 to 28 March 1973.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Board notes the applicant’s contention that his DD Form 214 be changed to show his correct date of induction into the Army and it finds this claim has merit.  However, it finds insufficient evidence to support the applicant’s claim of entitlement to the ARCOM.

2.  The evidence of record confirms that the applicant’s date of induction into the Army was 13 March 1968.  Therefore, the Board concludes that it would be appropriate to correct Item 10c of his 4 March 1970 DD Form 214 to read this date vice 13 March 1969 as is currently listed.  

3.  The evidence of record provides no confirmation that the applicant was ever recommended for and/or awarded the ARCOM by the proper authority.  Thus, the Board finds an insufficient evidentiary basis to support adding the ARCOM to the list of authorized awards contained in the applicant’s record.

4.  During its review of this case, the Board discovered that the applicant is entitled to additional awards that were not included in either his record or his separation document.  Lacking any derogatory information on file that would disqualify him from receiving the AGCM, or a specific disqualification from any of the active duty unit commanders for whom he served, the Board finds that he is entitled to the first award of the AGCM based on his qualifying period of honorable active duty service from 13 March 1968 through 4 March 1970.  

5.  Further, based on the applicant’s campaign participation and service in the RVN, he is entitled to 3 bronze service stars with his VSM and to the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation.  Thus, the Board concludes that it would also be appropriate to add these awards to his records at this time.  

6.  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 amending Item 10c (Date of Induction) of the 4 March 1970 
DD Form 214 of the individual concerned to read “13 March 1968” vice 
13 March 1969 as is currently listed; by awarding him the first award of the 
Army Good Conduct Medal, for his period of qualifying honorable active duty service from 13 March 1968 through 4 March 1970; by showing that based on his campaign participation and service in the RVN, he is entitled to 3 bronze service stars with his Vietnam Service Medal and to the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation; and by providing him a corrected separation document that reflects these corrections.  

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

BOARD VOTE:  

__FE__  ___KH__  ___MM_ _  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		Fred N. Eichorn
	                                               CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003087636	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED		
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	Partial Relief	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.66	107.0020	
2. 188	110.0000	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.