PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF:. BOARD DATE: 5 August 1999 DOCKET NUMBER: AR1999015746 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. Loren G. Harrell Director Analyst The following members, a quorum, were present: Chairperson Member 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) FINDINGS: 1. The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations. 2. The applicant requests that several items on his separation document be corrected. He notes that his SSAN is recorded incorrectly and that he believes he is entitled to a Bronze Star Medal and an Army Good Conduct Medal. He also states that he was inducted in pay grade E-2, not E-1 as indicated on his separation document and that he had only 10 years of formal education at the time of his release from active duty rather than the 12 years indicated in item 30 (remarks). The applicant also states that his separation document indicates he was separated in pay grade E-5 but he never received any orders promoting him to that grade. 3. Records available to the Board confirm he was inducted on 22 September 1966. He was a member of the Army National Guard and serving in pay grade E-2 at the time of his induction. Item 33 (appointments and reductions) on his DA Form 20 (enlisted qualification record) indicates he was inducted in pay grade E-1 based on Army Regulation 601-270 which established the policies and procedures for the induction of enlisted personnel. The applicant was, however, immediately promoted to pay grade E-2 that same day. Item 33 also shows the highest grade attained by the applicant was pay grade E-4 on 25 September 1967. 4. At the time the applicant entered active duty he had completed 10 years of formal education but successfully completed requirements for award of a high school GED in May 1968. 5. In August 1968 the applicant was awarded an Army Commendation Medal for meritorious achievement during the period 20 May 1968 through 2 August 1968 while a member of the 1st Infantry Division in Vietnam. 6. He was released from active duty on 7 August 1968. Item 3 on his DD Form 214 reflects a SSAN of when in fact his induction and other documents in his file confirm his SSAN was . Item 5a (grade/rate or rank) on the separation document indicates “SP 5” and item 5b (pay grade) reflects “E5” although his date of rank in item 6 is 25 September 1967, the date he was promoted to pay grade E-4. Item 19 (grade, rate or rank at time of entry into current active duty) reflects “PVT E-1.” 7. There is no indication the applicant was awarded an Army Good Conduct Medal and item 24 (decorations) on his DD Form 214 does not reflect his award of the Army Commendation Medal. 8. Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that the Bronze Star Medal is awarded to any person who distinguished himself by heroism or meritorious achievement or service, not involving participation in aerial flight in connection with military operations involving conflict with an opposing armed force. As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required. 9. Army Regulation 600-8-22 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. Current practice requires that the commander provide written notice of nonfavorable consideration and permits the individual to respond. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The evidence confirms the applicant’s SSAN was and not . It is apparent that a typographical error was made at the time his separation document was completed. 2. The evidence also confirms the applicant was awarded an Army Commendation Medal, which is not reflected on his separation document. There is, however, no evidence, and the applicant has not provided any, that he was ever recommended for or awarded a Bronze Star Medal. 3. The applicant completed a qualifying period for award of the Good Conduct Medal on 7 August 1968 when he was released from active duty. There is no evidence in the applicant's official military personnel file that his commander ever disqualified him for award of the Good Conduct Medal, nor is there any indication of any derogatory information. As such it would be appropriate to award the applicant the Good Conduct Medal for the period 22 September 1966 through 7 August 1968. 4. While the applicant’s separation document indicates he was separated in pay grade E-5 the evidence of records, confirmed by the applicant’s own statement, he was in fact only an E-4 at the time. The applicant’s own statement and the fact that the date of rank reflected in item 6 is associated with his promotion to pay grade E-4 also supports this conclusion. 5. Although the applicant may have entered active duty with only 10 years of formal education the fact that he earned his high school GED while on active duty accounts for the 12 years of civilian education reflected in item 30 (remarks) on his DD Form 214. 6. Additionally, although the applicant may have been immediately promoted to pay grade E-2 upon his entry on active duty in September 1966 his induction documents confirm he was “inducted” in pay grade E-1, hence the entry in item 19 (grade/rate or rank at time of entry into current active service) on his separation document is correct. 7. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below. RECOMMENDATION: 1. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected: a. by showing that the individual concerned was awarded an Army Commendation Medal as a result of his meritorious achievements while in Vietnam; b. by awarding him an Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 22 September 1966 through 7 August 1968; c. by showing in item 5a and 5b that he was separated in pay grade E-4 and not E-5; and d. by showing in item 3 that his SSAN vice . 2. That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied BOARD VOTE: __xx__ __xx___ ___xx__ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION ______________________ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR1999015746 SUFFIX RECON YYYYMMDD DATE BOARDED 19990805 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. 110.00 2. 107.00 3. 4. 5. 6. ABCMR Proceedings (cont) AR1999015746 2