RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            26 FEBRUARY 2004                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003091697

	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:

	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		Chairperson	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		Member	
	Ms. Mae M. Bullock		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 separation document be corrected to reflect award of the Bronze Star Medal with “V” device.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he received the Bronze Star Medal for meritorious service during the period March 1967 to March 1968.  However, he states that he also was awarded the Bronze Star Medal with “V” device for his heroic actions on 12 July 1967.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of the orders awarding him the Bronze Star Medal with “V” device.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an error which occurred on 
20 February 1969.  The application submitted in this case is dated 23 May 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.  Records available to the Board indicate that the applicant entered active duty on 23 February 1966.  He successfully completed training and was initially assigned to Fort Hood, Texas, prior to being reassigned to Vietnam in April 1967. While in Vietnam, he was assigned to the 2nd Battalion, 27th Infantry.

4.  Item 41 (awards and decorations) on the applicant’s Department of the Army Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) indicates that the applicant was awarded the Bronze Star Medal on 25 September 1967 by General Order 3801, issued by the 25th Infantry Division.  The entry, which does not reflect a “V” device, does reflect a date of 12 July 1967 in parentheses.  The entry in item 41 is consistent with the information confirmed in the orders provided by the applicant, which awarded him that Bronze Star Medal with “V” device.  There is no indication, or evidence, that the applicant was also awarded a Bronze Star Medal for meritorious service.

5.  The applicant departed Vietnam in April 1968 and completed his enlistment contract as a drill sergeant at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri.  He was released from active duty on 20 February 1969, in pay grade E-5, with an honorable characterization of service.  The applicant’s separation document reflects award of the Bronze Star Medal, but without the “V” device.

6.  A review of Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) notes the applicant’s unit was credited with participating in four designated campaigns (Vietnam Counteroffensive Phases II, III, and IV, and TET Counteroffensive) during the applicant’s period of assignment.  Four bronze service stars on the Vietnam Service Medal, which is recorded on his separation document, should reflect his campaign participation.  The unit was also awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm and the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation during his tenure with the organization.

7.  Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time when the service member was discharged, required that throughout a qualifying period of service for award of the Good Conduct Medal the enlisted person must have had all “excellent” conduct and efficiency ratings and no convictions by a court-martial.  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.  With the publication of the new Army Regulation 672-5-1, in 1974, the requirement for all excellent conduct and efficiency ratings was dropped and an individual was required to show that he/she willingly complied with the demands of the military environment, had been loyal and obedient, and faithfully supported the goals of his organization and the Army.  Today, Army Regulation 600-8-22, which replaced Army Regulation 672-5-1, notes that there is no automatic entitlement to the Army Good Conduct Medal and disqualification must be justified.  Current practice requires that the commander provide written notice of nonfavorable consideration and permits the individual to respond.

8.  The applicant’s conduct and efficiency ratings throughout his military service were excellent, and he had no record of any disciplinary actions or incidents of misconduct.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence clearly shows that the applicant’s Bronze Star Medal was awarded with a “V” device indicating the award was for valor.  The “V” device should be added to the Bronze Star Medal entry currently on his separation document.

2.  The evidence also shows that the applicant is entitled to four bronze service stars on his Vietnam Service Medal, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm, and the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation.

3.  The applicant completed a qualifying period of service for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal on 20 February 1969.  There is no evidence his commander ever disqualified him from receiving the award and no evidence of any misconduct which would justify denying him the award.  In view of the foregoing, it can be concluded that the applicant met the basic qualifications for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal and it would be appropriate and in the interest of equity to award him that decoration for the period 23 February 1966 through 20 February 1969.

BOARD VOTE:

__AAO __  __JTM __  __MMB__  GRANT RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for 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.  showing that the applicant’s Bronze Star Medal was awarded with a “V” device;

b.  showing he is entitled to four bronze service stars on his Vietnam Service Medal, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm, and the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation; and

c.  awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 
23 February 1966 to 20 February 1969.

		___Arthur A. Omartian___
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003091697	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20040226	
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.