IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 25 November 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080014012 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 reconsideration for award of the Meritorious Unit Commendation. 2. The applicant states, in effect, his unit received the Meritorious Unit Commendation while assigned to the Army-Navy Riverine Force. 3. The applicant provides, in support of his application, copies of two articles from the Internet entitled Army-Navy Mobile Riverine Force and Riverine Assault Force, and his previous Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) decision. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the ABCMR in Docket Number AR20070017982, on 17 April 2008. 2. In the original findings, the ABCMR determined the Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register), which lists campaign participation credit, assault landing credit, and unit citation emblems awarded during the Vietnam Conflict, did not show the applicant's unit, Company A, 3rd Battalion, 60th Infantry Regiment, 9th Infantry Division, had received the Meritorious Unit Commendation for Vietnam service. 3. The two articles from the Internet entitled, Army-Navy Mobile Riverine Force and Riverine Assault Force, submitted by the applicant are new evidence which require that his case be reconsidered by the ABCMR. 4. The article entitled Army-Navy Mobile Riverine Force provides a brief history of the Mobile Riverine Force and the types of missions completed by that force. It is mentioned in the article that the Navy Mobile Riverine Force and the Army 2nd Brigade of the 9th Infantry Division were to become partners in the war effort. A paragraph at the end of the article mentioned that the Sailors and Soldiers of the Mobile Riverine Force were awarded scores of personal awards for valor as well as many unit awards, one of which was the Meritorious Unit Commendation. However, specific units and dates of awards were not provided. 5. The article entitled Riverine Assault Force also provides a brief history of the Mobile Riverine Force and the types of missions completed by that force. This article also mentions the 2nd Brigade of the 9th Infantry Division as being a part of the Mobile Riverine Force. The article lists the composition of the Mobile Riverine Base from which normally one or two infantry battalions and one river assault squadron operated. However, the list does not include the applicant's unit, Company A, 3rd Battalion, 60th Infantry. 6. A history of the 2nd Brigade, 9th Infantry Division in the Republic of Vietnam from February 1966 to September 1967, obtained from the Internet, shows the 3rd Battalion, 60th Infantry was a part of the 2nd Brigade, 9th Infantry Division. 7. During his tour in the Republic of Vietnam, the applicant was assigned to the 3rd Battalion, 60th Infantry Regiment, 9th Infantry Division. 8. A copy of a citation submitted by the applicant with his original application shows the Meritorious Unit Commendation was awarded to Headquarters, Headquarters Company and Band, Support Command, 9th Infantry Division. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant contends that he is authorized the Meritorious Unit Commendation for his service in the Republic of Vietnam. 2. The articles submitted by the applicant provide histories of the Mobile Riverine Force and the types of missions completed by that force in the Republic of Vietnam. These articles do not provide specific awards, dates of awards, or the units receiving awards. 3. The citation for the Meritorious Unit Commendation, previously submitted by the applicant, was awarded to Headquarters, Headquarters Company and Band, Support Command, 9th Infantry Division There is no evidence the applicant was ever assigned to that unit. 4. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy that requirement. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ___X____ ___X____ __X____ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20070017982, dated 17 April 2008. _________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) AR20080014012 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080014012 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1