IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 30 August 2023 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20220010220 APPLICANT REQUESTS: * correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to reflect active duty in Lopburi Thailand from 31 August 1966 to 16 August 1967 * telephonic appearance before the Board by phone APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENT(S) CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Application for Health Benefits (2 Pages) * Certificate of Achievement * DD Form 214 * Army Reviews Boards Agency (ARBA) Letter acknowledging Congressional interest * Privacy Act Release Form FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the 3-year time frame provided in Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 2. The applicant states he needs the above correction to receive the benefits he is entitled to receive. He served his country faithfully, now he is suffering with many conditions. He suffered a stroke and is immobile, because of his combat service. He now requires special medication which costs approximately $9,000 a year out of pocket. 3. The applicant provided the following documents: * VA Application for Health Benefits (2 Pages) * Certificate of Achievement for outstanding work and devotion to duty from 31 August 1966 to 16 August 1967, given in Lopburi Thailand, at the Special Forces Operational Base, on 31 August 1967 * DD Form 214 showing honorable service from 3 January 1966 to 15 October 1967 * ARBA Letter acknowledging Congressional interest * Privacy Act Release Form 4. The applicant's military records show he was inducted into the Army of the United States on 3 January 1966, for 3 years. He completed training and was awarded military occupational specialty 73D (Accounting Specialist). a. He served in Thailand from 10 October 1966 to 30 October 1967 with Company D, 1st Special Forces Group (Airborne (ABN)), United States Army Pacific (USARPAC) until it was redesignated the 46th Special Forces Company (ABN) 1st Special Forces, USARPAC. b. On 15 October 1967, he was honorably released from active duty and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group (Annual), in pay grade E-5. 5. His DD Form 214 shows he was separated under AR 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), chapter 5, section VII, due to early separation of overseas returnee. He completed 1 year, 9 months, and 13 days of net active service during this period with 1 year and 5 days of service in USARPAC. His awards are listed as the National Defense Service Medal and Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge (Rifle M-14). 6. He may be entitled to an award that is not listed on his DD Form 214. 7. His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows he received excellent conduct and efficiency ratings throughout his enlistment. 8. His service record does not contain orders awarding him the 1st award of the Army Good Conduct Medal. However, his record does not contain any derogatory information that would have disqualified him from receiving this award. 9. He was honorably released from active duty, he completed 1 year, 9 months, and 13 days of active service and he was awarded or authorized the National Defense Service Medal. BOARD DISCUSSION: 1. After reviewing the application, all supporting documents, and the evidence found within the military record, the Board found that relief was warranted. The Board carefully considered the applicant's record of service, documents submitted in support of the petition and executed a comprehensive and standard review based on law, policy and regulations. Upon review of the applicant’s petition and available military records the Board determined there was sufficient evidence in the applicant’s records to show he served in Lopburi Thailand from 31 August 1966 to 16 August 1967. The Board agreed, correction to his DD Form 214 is warranted and his time will be annotated in the remarks sections of his DD Form 214. Additionally, the Board determined the applicant's service record did not reflect he was awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award) and his record shows he received "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings throughout his service for the period of 3 January 1966 to 15 October 1967. Based on this the Board determined relief was warranted and granted relief for correction of the applicant’s record to show award of the Army Good Conduct Medal and annotate his active duty time in Thailand. 2. The applicant’s request for a personal appearance hearing was carefully considered. In this case, the evidence of record was sufficient to render a fair and equitable decision. As a result, a personal appearance hearing is not necessary to serve the interest of equity and justice in this case. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 :X :X :X GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING : : : DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by * adding in block 30 (Remarks) Lopburi Thailand from 31 August 1966 to 16 August 1967 and * awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award) for exemplary service from 3 January 1966 to 15 October 1967 and adding the medal to his DD Form 214 for the period ending 15 October 1967. 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. REFERENCES: 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 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. 2. Army Regulation 15-185 (ABCMR) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR. Paragraph 2-11 contains guidance on ABCMR hearings, and it states that applicants do not have a right to a hearing before the ABCMR. The Director or the ABCMR may grant a formal hearing whenever justice requires. 3. Army Regulation 635-5 (Personnel Separations - Separation Documents), in effect at the time, prescribes the separation documents furnished to individuals who are retired, discharged, or released from active military service, to include the issuance of the DD Form 214. This version of the regulation required the issuance of a DD Form 214 for enlisted Soldiers at the time of discharge for the purpose of immediate reenlistment. The specific instructions for completion of item 22c (Foreign and/or Sea Service) state for enlisted personnel, enter total active duty outside continental limits of the United States for the period covered by the DD Form 214 and the last oversea theater in which service was performed, e.g., “Foreign and/or Sea Service USAREUR.” In the applicant’s case “USARPAC” “Thailand is not an authorized entry.” 4. Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Awards), in effect at the time, stated the Army Good Conduct Medal was awarded for each 3 years of continuous enlisted active Federal military service completed on or after 27 August 1940; for first award only, 1 year served entirely during the period 7 December 1941 to 2 March 1946; and, for the first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June 1950 of less than 3 years but more than 1 year. The enlisted person must have had all “excellent” conduct and efficiency ratings. Ratings of “Unknown” for portions of the period under consideration were not disqualifying. Service school efficiency ratings based upon academic proficiency of at least “Good” rendered subsequent to 22 November 1955 were not disqualifying. There must have been no convictions by a court-martial. However, there was no right or entitlement to the medal until the immediate commander made a positive recommendation for its award and until the awarding authority announced the award in general orders. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20220010220 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1