RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:            FEBRUARY 12, 2004                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003090676

	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. Luis Almodova		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Joann Langston		Chairperson	
	Mr. Robert J. Osborn		Member	
	Mr. Lester Echols		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, in effect, that the Air Medal with Numeral 26 and with a "V" Device be added to his DD Form 214, Report of Transfer or Discharge.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was issued the Air Medal and should have the Numeral 26, and with a "V" Device, added to his DD Form 214.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214, with an effective date of 21 January 1968, under cover of a transmittal form from the Department of Veterans' Affairs, State of Illinois, in support of his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an error, which occurred on 21 January 1968.  The application submitted, in this case, is dated 28 April 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 inducted into the Army of the United States on 20 April 1966.  He completed basic combat and advanced individual training at Fort Polk, Louisiana, and was awarded the primary military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B, Light Weapons Infantryman, on completion of all training.

4.  The applicant was assigned to and arrived in Vietnam on 16 October 1966.  He was initially assigned to the 336th Aviation Company, 1st Aviation Brigade.  On 27 October 1967, he was reassigned to Company C, 227th Aviation Battalion, 1st Cavalry Division.  He remained with this unit until he was returned to the United States for release from active duty.

5.  The applicant was honorably released from active duty, on 21 January 1968, in the rank and pay grade, Specialist Four, E-4, under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200, section VII, chapter 5, overseas returnee.  On his release from active duty, the applicant had 1 year, 9 months, and 2 days active military service, with no lost time.

6.  Block 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized), of the applicant's DD Form 214, shows he was awarded the following:  the National Defense Service Medal; the Vietnam Service Medal; the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal; the Aircraft Crewman Badge; the Basic Air Medal; the Air Medal, with Numeral 22; the Army Commendation Medal; and the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge, with M-14 Rifle Bar.

7.  The applicant's DD Form 214 incorrectly shows that he was awarded the Army Commendation Medal.  The applicant was awarded the Army Commendation Medal, with "V" Device, by General Orders Number 4309, section I, published by the 1st Aviation Brigade on 12 September 1967.

8.  The applicant's DD Form 214 fails to shows that the Air Medal, first oak leaf cluster was awarded with a "V" Device.  The applicant was awarded the Air Medal, first oak leaf cluster with "V" Device, by General Orders Number 4360, section I, published by the 1st Aviation Brigade on 14 September 1967.

9.  The applicant's DD Form 214 incorrectly shows he was only awarded the Air Medal, with Numeral 22.  The applicant was awarded the 23rd and 24th awards of the Air Medal, by General Orders Number 392, section V, published by the 1st Aviation Brigade, dated 29 January 1968.  There is no record of the applicant having been awarded the twenty-fifth and twenty-sixth award of the Air Medal.

10.  An undated, but signed, DA Form 137, Installation Clearance Record, in the applicant's service personnel records shows that he was recommended for award of the Good Conduct Medal, on his departure from Vietnam.  The applicant's conduct and efficiency ratings recorded in Item 38, Record of Assignments, of the applicant's DA Form 20, Enlisted Qualification Record, were consistently "excellent" through his Army service.  The DD Form 214 does not show the Good Conduct Medal as an approved award.

11.  The applicant was awarded the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Automatic Rifle Bar in Special Orders 204, paragraph 214, published by Headquarters, Fort Polk, Louisiana, dated 8 August 1966.

12.  While in Vietnam, the applicant participated in the following two campaigns:  the Vietnam Counteroffensive, Phase III, which extended from 1 June 1967 through 29 January 1968; and the Tet Counteroffensive, which extended from 30 January through 1 April 1968.

13.  The applicant's DD Form 214 shows entitlement to the Vietnam Service Medal; however, it does not show the two bronze service stars to which the applicant is entitled for his campaign participation.

14.  AR 600-8-22, in pertinent part, authorizes award of a bronze service star, based on qualifying service, for each campaign listed in its Appendix B and states that authorized bronze service stars will be worn on the appropriate service medal, in this case, the Vietnam Service Medal.

15.  Department of the Army (DA) Pamphlet 672-3, Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register, dated 29 January 1988, lists unit awards received by units serving in Vietnam.  This document shows that the unit the applicant served with in Vietnam, the 336th Aviation Company, 1st Aviation Brigade, was awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross, with Palm, Unit Citation, for the period 1 March 1966 through 26 March 1967 by Department of the Army General Orders (DAGO) 22, dated 1968, and for the period 27 March 1967 through 17 May 1968, by DAGO 46, 1969, at the time the applicant was a member of the unit.

16.  DA Pamphlet 672-3, also shows that Company C, 227th Aviation Battalion, 1st Cavalry Division, was awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross, with Palm, Unit Citation, for the period 9 August 1965 through 19 May 1969 by DAGO 59, dated 1969, and the Valorous Unit Award, for the period 1 through 31 October 1967 by DAGO 39, 1970, at the time the applicant was a member of the unit.

17.  AR 670-1, chapter 29, prescribes policy and guidance for wear of U.S. and foreign unit awards.  This regulation states that a soldier may wear the unit award permanently if the individual was assigned to, and present for duty with the unit any time during the period cited; or was attached by competent orders to, and present for duty with the unit during the entire period, or for at least thirty consecutive days of the period cited.  Individuals may not wear more than one Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation and one Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal Unit Citation; this precludes wear of the Vietnamese fourrageres, which represent additional unit awards.

18.  AR 672-5-1, in effect at the time of the applicant's separation 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.  To be eligible for award of the Good Conduct Medal, soldiers must meet all of the following criteria:  all conduct (character) and efficiency ratings must be recorded as "Excellent" except that ratings of "Unknown" for portions of the period under consideration are not disqualifying.  Service school efficiency ratings based upon academic proficiency of at least "Good" rendered subsequent to 22 November 1955 are not disqualifying.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant was awarded 24 awards of the Air Medal.  The second award of the Air Medal was awarded with a "V" Device.  The applicant's DD Form 214 only shows the award of 22 Air Medals and none with a "V" Device.  It would be appropriate to correct his DD Form 214 to show award of the Air Medal with numeral 24 and with the "V" Device.

2.  There is no evidence, and the applicant has provided none, to show that he was awarded the 25th and 26th awards of the Air Medal.  He is therefore ineligible to have these awards added to his separation document at this time.

3.  The applicant had "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings throughout his time in the Army.  There is no evidence of indiscipline or a breach of good conduct on the applicant's part, while he served on active duty.  The applicant was recommended for award of the Good Conduct Medal on his departure from Vietnam.  He is therefore eligible for award of the Good Conduct Medal for the period 20 April 1966 through 21 January 1968.

4.  The applicant participated in two campaigns during his tour of duty in Vietnam.  He is therefore entitled to award of two bronze service stars to be affixed to his already-awarded Vietnam Service Medal and to have them shown on his separation document.

5.  The applicant served in units, which were awarded the Valorous Unit Award, and three awards of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross, with Palm, Unit Citation.  These unit awards are not shown on his DD Form 214 because they were awarded after the applicant was released from active duty; nonetheless, he is entitled to these unit awards and to have them added to his DD Form 214 at this time.

6.  The applicant was awarded the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge, with Automatic Rifle Bar.  This badge is not shown on his DD Form 214.  It would be appropriate to add this badge to his DD Form 214 at this time.

BOARD VOTE:

Jl   _____  rjo  _____  le ______  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: 

	a.  deleting the Air Medal with Numeral 22, from item 24, of the applicant's DD Form 214, and entering in its place, the Air Medal, with Numeral 24, and with "V" Device;

	b.  deleting the Army Commendation Medal, from item 24, of the applicant's DD Form 214,and entering in its place, the Army Commendation Medal with "V" Device;

	c.  awarding the applicant the Good Conduct Medal for the period 20 April 1966 through 21 January 1968, and adding this award to his separation document;

d.  awarding the applicant two bronze service stars to be affixed to his already-awarded Vietnam Service Medal, to denote his participation in two campaigns while he served in the Republic of Vietnam, and to show these two bronze service stars on his separation document;

e.  awarding the applicant the Valorous Unit Award; and three awards of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross, with Palm, Unit Citation; and having these unit awards added to his DD Form 214; and

	f.  adding the already-awarded Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Automatic Rifle Bar, to the applicant's separation document.

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 adding the 25th and 26th awards of the Air Medal to the applicant's separation document at this time.

		____Joann Langston____
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR20030090676	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20040212	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  46	107.0000	
2.  64	107.0018	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.