RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:         06 JANUARY 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2004106632


      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. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Ms. Deborah L. Brantley           |     |Senior Analyst       |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Fred Eichorn                  |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Richard Dunbar                |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Yolanda Maldonado             |     |Member               |

      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, in effect, reconsideration of his request for
award of the Army Commendation Medal.

2.  The applicant states that it is hard for him to believe the Army was
unable to locate a copy of his award orders and contends, based on several
errors he noted in his original Record of Proceedings, that those errors
likely resulted in the Board’s inability to confirm his Army Commendation
Medal.

3.  The applicant notes that the original Record of Proceedings indicate
that he served in Vietnam with the 574th Engineer Company (redesignated as
the 339th Supply Company) between 7 June 1967 and 6 June 1968 and again
with the 10th Transportation Company from 13 December 1968 through 12
December 1969.  He states he served with the 574th Engineer Company/339th
Supply Company in Okinawa and not Vietnam.

4.  He states that he did serve in Vietnam from May 1967 through September
1967 with the 551st Light Maintenance Company, and questions why that unit
was not mentioned in the original Record of Proceedings.

5.  He states the Board indicated he participated in seven campaigns while
in Vietnam.  However, he states that he was not in Vietnam for the TET
Counteroffensive (30 January through 1 April 1998) or the Vietnam
Counteroffensive Phase IV (2 April through 30 June 1968) and as such,
cannot accept the bronze service stars for those campaigns.

6.  He states that he can also not accept the Meritorious Unit Citation
awarded for the period 7 June 1967 through 6 June 1968 to the 574th
Engineer Company/339th Supply Company, because he was not assigned to the
unit in Vietnam.  However, he states that if the unit received the award
for the period June 1966 through April 1967 for support of the Vietnam War
while the unit was in Okinawa, he would accept the award.

7.  He states he will never wear any military awards that he did not earn
and noted that while the Board cannot find orders for an award granted
after he was released from active duty, it can give him awards that he did
not earn.

8.  The applicant provides no new evidence, beyond his self-authored
statement.



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
Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number
AR2003092849 on 29 January 2004.

2.  A further review of the applicant’s available files confirms that he
was in fact assigned to the 574th Engineer Company/339th Supply Company,
located in Okinawa, between July 1966 and April 1967.  He did not serve
with that unit in Vietnam.  His service in Okinawa is confirmed in item 31
(Foreign Service) and item 38 (Record of Assignment) on his Department of
the Army Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record).  Department of the Army
Pamphlet 672-3 does confirm that the 339th Supply Company was in fact
awarded a Meritorious Unit Commendation for the period 31 October 1965
through 31 December 1966.  According to an entry in item 38 on the
applicant’s Form 20 he was assigned to the 339th Supply Company on 1
December 1966.

3.  Items 31 and 38 on the applicant’s Form 20 further confirms that he
arrived in Vietnam on 8 June 1967 and was ultimately assigned to the 551st
Light Maintenance Company.

4.  Although item 31 on the applicant’s Form 20 indicates that his service
in Vietnam continued until either January or June 1968 (the handwritten
entry is difficult to read), item 38 indicates that on 9 November 1967 he
was attached to a special troops unit at Fort Dix, New Jersey after being
reported as AWOL (absent without leave) on 8 November 1967.  By December
1967 he was listed in a deserter status and in January 1968 he was in
confinement.  In February 1968 he was assigned to the special troops unit
at Fort Dix and in April 1968 he was again reported as a deserter.
Ultimately, after several more periods of confinement and AWOL, all while
being carried on the rolls of units at Fort Dix, New Jersey, he was
restored to duty and assigned to the 10th Transportation Company in
Vietnam.

5.  In view of the fact that as of 8 November 1967 the applicant was, at
the very least, not performing military duties because of his AWOL status
and his subsequent attachment to a unit at Fort Dix, New Jersey, the
applicant’s initial tour of duty in Vietnam would have spanned the
approximate period of 8 June



1967 through 7 November 1967.  During that period, the 551st Transportation
Company was not awarded any unit decorations.  It did, however, participate
in one designated campaign period (Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase III).

6.  Item 31 and item 28 on the applicant’s Form 20 both indicate that the
applicant arrived in Vietnam on 13 December 1968 for his second tour of
duty and was assigned to the 10th Transportation Company on 23 December.
He remained in Vietnam until 10 December 1969 when he returned to the
United States for separation processing.  Department of the Army Pamphlet
672-3 confirms that the 10th Transportation Company was awarded two
Meritorious Unit Commendations while the applicant was assigned to the
organization, and that he would have participated in four designated
campaigns (Republic of Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase VI, TET 69
Counteroffensive, Vietnam Summer-Fall 1969, and Vietnam Winter-Spring
1970).

7.  The award certificate which was provided by the applicant with his
original application, was not discussed in the Board’s original Record of
Proceedings, other than to conclude that it was insufficient, in the
absence of orders, to serve as verification that the applicant had been
awarded the decoration.

8.  The certificate, however, reflects the applicant’s correct grade, name,
and social security number.  It indicates that he was awarded the Army
Commendation Medal on 1 December 1969, for meritorious service from
“January 1969 to January 1970.  The certificate was authenticated by a
Colonel Gibson and contains the imprinted signature of Stanley R. Resor who
was the Secretary of the Army between 1965 and 1971.  The applicant’s
conduct and efficiency ratings during his second tour of duty in Vietnam
were consistently excellent and he was promoted from pay grade E-1 to pay
grade E-4 while assigned to the 10th Transportation Company.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  In spite of the fact that the original Record of Proceedings may have
incorrectly identified the applicant’s units of assignment while in
Vietnam, ultimately he was entitled to three awards of the Meritorious Unit
Commendation; one awarded to his unit in Okinawa and two awarded to the
10th Transportation Company.  As such the recommendation to correct his
records to show entitlement to three awards of the Meritorious Unit
Commendation remains valid.




2.  The applicant is correct in noting that he participated in only five
designated campaigns while in Vietnam, not the seven noted in the original
Record of Proceedings.  It is possible that the error stemmed from
utilizing the incorrect tour date recorded in item 31 on his Form 20, and
not the information contained in item 38.  The evidence confirms that the
applicant is entitled to one silver service star on his Vietnam Service
Medal, and not the two additional bronze service stars.  His records should
be corrected accordingly.

3.  While there are no orders in the applicant's available records awarding
him the Army Commendation Medal, the appropriate Secretary of the Army
signed his award certificate, and the period of service covered by the
award is generally consistent with his dates of service in Vietnam.

4.  It is likely, based on the fact the award certificate was issued on 1
December 1969, and covered the period January 1969 to January 1970 that
such meritorious service awards were being issued in conjunction with an
individual’s tour completion.  Because the applicant was not assigned to
the 10th Transportation Company until 23 December 1968, it is possible the
individual initiating the award recommendation determined the applicant
began contributing to the unit’s mission in January 1969, after the holiday
period.  Because the awards goes “to” January 1970 and not “through”
January, one could also argue that the award was intended to recognize the
applicant’s contributions “through” December, the month the applicant
departed.  At this point, more than 30 years after the fact, it is
difficult to determine what the recommender or awards approval authority
intended when utilizing the dates reflected on the award certificate.
However, the dates on the award do not necessarily reflect any error or
injustice and as such, does not justify issuance of a new certificate with
different dates.

5.  There is no reason to question the authenticity of the award
certificate, particularly in view of the fact that the applicant received
excellent conduct and efficiency ratings, and was promoted three pay grades
while assigned to the unit. In the interest of equity it would be
appropriate for the Board to accept the applicant’s award certificate as
authentication of entitlement to the Army Commendation Medal and in the
interest of justice concludes it would be appropriate to add the award to
his separation document.






BOARD VOTE:

___FE __  ___RD __  ___YM __  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant
amendment of the ABCMR’s decision in Docket Number AR2003092849, dated 29
January 2004.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the
Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by confirming his
entitlement to the Army Commendation Medal and by showing that he is
entitled to one silver service star on his Vietnam Service Medal and not
the two additional bronze service stars noted in the original proceedings.




                                  ______Fred Eichorn________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2004106632                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20040106                                |
|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.       |107.00                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]