RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 2 August 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070003062 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. Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano Director Mr. Michael L. Engle Analyst The following members, a quorum, were present: Mr. Curtis L. Greenway Chairperson Mr. Robert W. Soniak Member Ms. Karmin S. Jenkins Member 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 correction of his military records to show award of the Vietnam Service Medal, Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal, and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation. 2. The applicant states, in effect, that his last overseas tour of duty was in the Republic of Vietnam and he was not awarded the medals for this service. 3. The applicant provides copies of his Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge (DD Form 214), Report of Separation from Active Duty (DD Form 214), and selected pages from his medical records. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice which occurred on 24 June 1974, the date of his discharge. The application submitted in this case is dated 23 February 2007. 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 limitations 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. On 6 January 1965, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years. He completed his initial training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 16B1O (Launcher Crewman). 4. Special Orders Number 152, 4th Missile Battalion, 562nd Artillery Brigade, Duncanville, Texas, dated 30 August 1965, awarded the applicant the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Carbine Bar. 5. On 20 May 1966, the applicant was assigned to the United States Army Europe for duty in Italy. 6. Special Orders Number 177, United States Army Southern European Task Force, dated 22 August 1967, awarded the applicant the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M14). 7. Special Orders Number 201, United States Southern European Task Force, dated 21 September, awarded the applicant the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Pistol Bar. 8. On 5 January 1968, the applicant was honorably released from active duty. He had completed 3 years of creditable active service. 9. Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant's DD Form 214 for the period ending 5 January 1968 lists his awards as the National Defense Service Medal. It does not show award of the Vietnam Service Medal, Meritorious Unit Commendation, Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal, or the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation. 10. On 31 May 1968, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years. He retained his previous MOS of 16B1O and was assigned for duty with the 4th Battalion, 62nd Artillery Brigade, Fort Bliss, Texas. 11. On 30 April 1969, the applicant received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for being absent without leave (AWOL) during the period from about 30 March to 30 April 1969. The punishment included reduction to grade E3, a forfeiture of $51, and 14 days restriction. 12. A Chronological Record of Medical Care (SF 600) shows that from 3 to 17 May 1969, the applicant received medical treatment at the Americal Combat Center Dispensary for severe sunburn. 13. Item 31 (Foreign Service) of the applicant's DA Form 20 shows his only overseas service was in Italy for 19 months from 20 May 1966 to 6 December 1967. There is no evidence of record showing that he served in the Republic of Vietnam. 14. Item 38 (Record of Assignments) of the applicant's Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows that he was assigned for duty at Fort Bliss, Texas during the period from 31 May 1968 through 4 January 1970, when he was dropped from the rolls due to desertion. 15. On 27 May 1974, the applicant was returned to military control and was subsequently discharged under the provision of Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 10, for the Good of the Service. He had completed a total of 4 years, 6 months, and 7 days of creditable active service and had 1,662 days of AWOL. 16. Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant's DD Form 214 for the period ending 24 June 1974 shows "None." 17. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part, for award of the Vietnam Service Medal. This medal is awarded to all members of the Armed Forces of the United States for qualifying service in Vietnam after 3 July 1965 through 28 March 1973. Qualifying service included attachment to or assignment for 1 or more days with an organization participating in or directly supporting military operations. 18. Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, for award of the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal. This medal was awarded by the Government of Vietnam to all members of the Armed Forces of the United States for qualifying service in Vietnam during the period 1 March 1961 through 28 March 1973. Qualifying service included assignment in Vietnam for 6 months or more and contributed direct combat support to the Republic of Vietnam and Armed Forces. Individuals who had qualified for award of the Vietnam Service Medal or the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal and were evacuated prior to completing six months of service due wounds resulting from hostile action were entitled to award of the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal. 19. Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation was awarded by the Vietnamese government for valorous combat achievement. It was awarded with Palm to a unit cited before the Armed Forces; with Gold Star to a unit cited before a corps; with Silver Star to a unit cited before a division; and with a Bronze Star to a unit cited before a regiment or brigade. 20. Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that the Meritorious Unit Commendation, Army, is awarded to units for exceptionally meritorious conduct in the performance of outstanding services for at least 6 continuous months during a period of military operations against an armed enemy occurring on or after 1 January 1944. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's medical treatment record for May 1969, showing that he was treated for sunburn at the Americal Combat Center Dispensary is not sufficiently convincing to show that he served a tour of duty in the Republic of Vietnam. The applicant's DA Form 20 shows him assigned to Fort Bliss, Texas during May 1969. It does not show any service in the Republic of Vietnam. There are no orders in his personnel file showing that he was ever assigned to a unit in the Republic of Vietnam. Lacking any corroborative evidence, the applicant's request should not be granted. 2. Special Orders show that the applicant was awarded the Expert Qualification Badge with Rifle, Carbine, and Pistol Bars. 3. Evidence shows that the applicant’s records contain administrative error which does not require action by the Board. Therefore, administrative correction of the applicant’s records will be accomplished by the Case Management Support Division (CMSD), St. Louis, Missouri, as outlined by the Board in paragraph 3 of the BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION section below. 4. Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or injustice now under consideration on 24 June 1974; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on 23 June 1977. The applicant did not file within the 3-year statute of limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation or evidence to show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse failure to timely file in this case. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING __RWS__ __KSJ __ __CLG _ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 1. The Board determined that the evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. 2. As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year statute of limitations prescribed by law. Therefore, there is insufficient basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for correction of the records of the individual concerned. 3. The Board determined that administrative error in the records of the individual concerned should be corrected. Therefore, the Board requests that the CMSD-St. Louis administratively correct the records of the individual concerned by showing that, in addition to the awards shown on his DD Form 214 for the period ending 5 January 1968 his awards include the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle, Carbine, and Pistol Bars. ___ Curtis L. Greenway ___ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20070003062 SUFFIX RECON DATE BOARDED 20070802 TYPE OF DISCHARGE DATE OF DISCHARGE DISCHARGE AUTHORITY DISCHARGE REASON BOARD DECISION DENY REVIEW AUTHORITY ISSUES 1. 107 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.