IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 5 August 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080003302 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, that Item 23a (Specialty Number and Title) of his separation document (DD Form 214) be corrected to show his primary specialty number as 12C2O. He also requests the award of the Army Good Conduct Medal. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he was discharged from the Army as a First Cook, but should have been a Bridge Crewman. He also was never given the Army Good Conduct Medal. He would like for his records to be corrected not just for himself, but for his children and grandchildren. He gave the best to his country and he thinks the country should do the same. 3. The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 and DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record). CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. 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 also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing. 2. The applicant's military personnel records show he was inducted into the Army of the United States on 10 January 1966. He had completed the necessary training and was awarded the military occupational specialty (MOS) 12A (Pioneer). 3. Item 38 (Record of Assignments) of his DA Form 20 shows he served in MOS 12C2O (Bridge Specialist), with the 554th Engineer Company (Float Bridge) in the Republic of Vietnam during the period of 7 September 1966 to 24 December 1966. He then served in MOS 94B2O (Cook) during the period of 25 December 1966 to 14 October 1967. 4. He was honorably released from active duty and transferred to U.S. Army Reserve Control Group (Annual Training), St. Louis, Missouri, on 16 October 1967. He completed 1 year, 9 months, and 7 days of Net Service This Period. 5. Item 23a of his DD Form 214 shows the entry 94B2O Cook. 6. Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of his DD Form 214 shows the awards of the National Defense Service Medal, Vietnam Service Medal, and Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960). However, it does not show the award of the Army Good Conduct Medal. 7. Headquarters, 554th Engineer Company (Float Bridge) Unit Orders Number 10, dated 29 January 1967, shows that the applicant was appointed to the temporary grade specialist four (E-4) in MOS 94B2O. 8. Department of the Army, Headquarters, 19th Engineer Battalion (Combat) (Army), Special Orders Number 39, dated 8 February 1967, shows that MOS 94B2O was awarded to the applicant and MOS 12A1O was withdrawn. 9. Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), in pertinent part, provides that Item 23a of the DD Form 214, will reflect the specialty and title number awarded at the time of separation from the service. 10. Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Military Awards), in effect at the time when the applicant was discharged, required that throughout a qualifying period of service for award of the Army 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. 11. Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) lists the unit awards received by units serving in the Republic of Vietnam. This document shows that all units assigned in the Republic of Vietnam from 8 February 1962 through 28 March 1973 were awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, based on Department of the Army General Order Number 8, dated 1974. 12. The applicant's record shows that he was awarded the Vietnam Service Medal. However, his DD Form 214 does not show any bronze service stars indicating campaign credit. 13. Appendix B of Army Regulation 600-8-22 shows that based on the applicant's dates of service in the Republic of Vietnam, he participated and received campaign credit for the Vietnam Counteroffensive, Phase II (1 July   1966 to 31 May 1967) and Vietnam Counteroffensive, Phase III (1 June 1967 to 29 January 1968). This same regulation states that a bronze service star will be awarded for wear on the Vietnam Service Medal for participation in each campaign. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant contends that Item 23a of his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show his primary specialty number as 12C2O. He also contends he should be awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal. 2. Special Orders Number 39, dated 8 February 1967, shows that the applicant was awarded MOS 94B2O and MOS 12A1O was withdrawn. Therefore, he is not entitled to correction to show MOS 12C2O in Item 23a of his DD Form 214. 3. Records show he is authorized the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 10 January 1966 to 16 October 1967 for completion of a period of qualifying service less than three years, but more than one year, ending with the termination of a period of Federal military service. His record shows he received conduct and efficiency ratings of “excellent” throughout his service. Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his record to show this award. 4. Evidence shows the applicant is authorized the award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation. Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his record to show this foreign unit award. 5. Evidence shows he participated in two campaigns during his service in the Republic of Vietnam. Therefore, he is entitled to two bronze service stars to be affixed to his Vietnam Service Medal. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ___X_____ ___X_____ ___X_____ GRANT PARTIAL 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. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing the awards of the Army Good Conduct Medal (first award) for the period 10 January 1966 to 16 October 1967, Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, and the two bronze service stars to be affixed to his already-awarded Vietnam Service Medal. 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 MOS 12C2O. __________X____________ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080003302 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080003302 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1