RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF

	BOARD DATE:            December 2, 2003                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:    AR2003089549

	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. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		Member	
	Mr. Patrick H. McGann		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).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:  

1.  The applicant requests that his report of separation (DD Form 214) be corrected to reflect his service in Vietnam, Korea, and Okinawa and that he be awarded any awards to which he is entitled for service in those overseas areas.

2.  The applicant states that he served in Vietnam, Okinawa, South Korea and Germany during his enlistment ending in 1971; however, his DD Form 214 only reflects his service in Germany (USAREUR) on his DD Form 214.  He states that he wants all of his foreign service reflected on his DD Form 214 and to be awarded any awards that he is entitled to for that service. 

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an error which occurred on 3 August 1971.  The application submitted in this case is dated 18 March 2003.  

2.  Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file within the 3-year statute of limitation if the ABCMR determines that it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  The applicant was initially inducted in Jacksonville, Florida, on 19 November 1963 and served as a field artillery crewman until he was honorably released from active duty at Fort Bliss, Texas, on 18 November 1965, due to the expiration of his term of service (ETS).  He was awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal for his service.  He enlisted in the Florida Army National Guard in November 1965 and served until his honorable discharge on 3 August 1967.

4.  He enlisted in the Regular Army in Jacksonville, Florida, on 4 August 1967, for a period of 4 years and assignment to Homestead Air Force Base (HAFB), Florida.  He successfully completed his training and was assigned to HAFB for duty as a Hawk Missile Crewman.

5.  While at HAFB, the applicant volunteered for duty in Vietnam and on 15 August 1968, orders were published directing his assignment to the Overseas Replacement Detachment at Fort Lewis, Washington, for further assignment to Vietnam.  He was transferred to Vietnam on 31 October 1968; however, on 2 November 1968, he was further transferred to a missile battalion in Okinawa.

6.  He remained in Okinawa until 8 May 1969, when he was transferred to a Hawk missile battery in Korea.  He remained in Korea until 21 January 1970, when he was transferred to a unit at Fort Bliss.  On 2 September 1970, he was transferred with his unit to Germany, where he remained until 24 July 1971, when he was returned to Fort Bliss. 

7.  On 3 August 1971, he was honorably discharged in the pay grade of E-5, due to ETS.  He had served 4 years of active service during his current enlistment and was awarded the National Defense Service Medal and the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (for service in Korea).  In block 22c of his DD Form 214, it shows that he served 2 years, 1 month and 14 days of foreign service and that his last overseas tour was performed in USAREUR.  His records show that he had excellent conduct and efficiency ratings throughout his service and they contain no derogatory information.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 serves as the authority for decorations and awards.  It provides, in pertinent part, that to be eligible for award of the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM), members of the Armed Forces must be attached or assigned to organizations participating in or directly supporting military operations for 1 or more days. 

9.  That regulation also prescribes Army policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning award of the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM).  It states, in pertinent part, that the AGCM was established by Executive Order 8809, 28 June 1941 and was amended by Executive Order 9323, 1943 and by Executive Order 10444, 10 April 1953 and is awarded for exemplary behavior, efficiency, and fidelity in active Federal military service.  The regulation also states, in pertinent part, that for first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June 1950, a period of service of less than 3 years but more than 1 year qualifies for award of the AGCM.

10.  Army Regulation 635-5, in effect at the time, provided instructions for the preparation of the DD Form 214.  It states, in pertinent part, that in block 22c, the area (major command) in which the service member performed their last overseas assignment will be annotated in that block.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Although it appears that the applicant was only in Vietnam for 2 days, he met the prerequisites for award of the VSM.  Accordingly, it would be in the interest of justice to award it to him at this time.

2.  The evidence of record shows that the applicant was awarded the AGCM for his service during his first period of service; however, he was not awarded the AGCM for his second period of service and there is nothing in his records to suggest that he was not entitled to his second award of the AGCM.  Therefore, it would also be in the interest of justice to award him the AGCM (2nd Award) at this time.

3.  The applicant's contention that all of his service in all overseas areas should be reflected separately on his DD Form 214 has been noted; however, the evidence of record shows that his DD Form 214 was prepared in accordance with the applicable regulations in effect at the time by reflecting only the last command in which overseas service was performed.  Accordingly, there is no basis to change that entry.

BOARD VOTE:

_PM___  __MM__  __FE____  GRANT RELIEF 

________  ________  ______  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ______  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief and to excuse failure to timely file.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by awarding the individual concerned the VSM and the second award of the AGCM.

2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to listing all overseas areas served on his DD Form 214.  

		Fred N. Eichorn
                                                        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003089549	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2003/12/02	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1971/08/03	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(GRANT)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.107.0056	102/AGCM	
2.107.0073	119/VSM	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.