IN THE CASE OF:	

		BOARD DATE:	  5 March 2009

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080018373


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 his award of the Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) be added to his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that an administrative error by his command’s personnel office caused his ARCOM award to be omitted from his DD Form 214.

3.  The applicant provides a newspaper article and a copy of his DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) in support of his application.

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 record shows he initially enlisted in the Regular Army and entered active duty on 13 February 1963, and that he was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty 63B (Wheel Vehicle Mechanic).  After a break in service, he enlisted in the Regular Army on 3 December 1974.  His record also shows he was promoted to sergeant first class on 1 September 1981, and that this is the highest rank he attained while serving on active duty.

3.  The applicant's original DA Form 2-1 shows in item 9 (Awards, Decorations, and Campaigns) that he earned the following awards during his active duty tenure:  National Defense Service Medal (NDSM), Vietnam Service Medal (VSM), Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal (RVNCM), Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross (RVNGC) with Palm Unit Citation, two Overseas Service Bars, Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM) (6th Award), Mechanic Badge, Army Service Ribbon (ASR), Overseas Service Ribbon (OSR) (1st Award), Noncommissioned Officer Professional Development Ribbon (NCOPDR) with Numeral 3, and Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar.  The ARCOM is not included in this list of awards and the applicant last audited this record on 18 May 1982.

4.  The applicant's record is void of any orders or other documents that show he was ever recommended for or awarded the ARCOM by proper authority while serving on active duty.

5.  On 8 September 1982, the applicant was retired by reason of physical disability.  The DD Form 214 he was issued at that time shows he completed a total of 18 years, 9 months, and 6 days of active military service.  The following awards were listed in Item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of his DD Form 214:  NDSM, VSM with one silver service star, RVNCM, RVNGC with Palm Unit Citation, AGCM (6th Award), Mechanic Badge, ASR, OSR (1st Award), and NCOPDR with Numeral 3.

6.  A DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214) was issued on 13 January 2009. This DD Form 215 amended item 13 of his original DD Form 214 by deleting the OSR (1st Award) and by adding the Meritorious Service Medal, Meritorious Unit Commendation, Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation, Overseas Service Ribbon with Numeral 2, and Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar.

7.  The applicant provides a newspaper article which indicates he earned the ARCOM for meritorious service while serving as a motor sergeant with the 

36th Engineer Battalion in Vinh Long, Vietnam.  He also provides a copy of his DA Form 2-1 which includes a handwritten entry that indicates he was awarded the ARCOM.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy and criteria concerning individual military awards.  Paragraph 3-17 of the awards regulation contains guidance on award of the ARCOM.  It states, in pertinent part, that the ARCOM is awarded to any member of the Armed Forces of the United States who, while serving in any capacity with the Army after 6 December 
1941, distinguishes himself or herself by heroism, meritorious achievement, or meritorious service.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's claim of entitlement to the ARCOM and the evidence he provides has been carefully considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence to support his claim.

2.  By regulation, the ARCOM may only be awarded by the proper award approval authority based on a valid recommendation.  The evidence of record contains no orders or other documents that show the applicant was ever recommended for or awarded the ARCOM by proper authority while he served on active duty, and although he provides a news article that indicates he was awarded the ARCOM, he fails to provide award orders or a recommendation for this award.  Further, although there is a pencil entry for the ARCOM on the DA Form 2-1 provided by the applicant, there is no such entry on the 
DA Form 2-1 on file in his record which he last audited on 18 May 1982 shortly before his retirement.  As a result, absent any evidence of record corroborating the information provided by the applicant, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support granting the requested relief.

3.  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 this requirement.

4.  The applicant and all others concerned should know that this action in no way diminishes the sacrifices made by the applicant in service to our Nation.  The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of his service in arms.


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 for correction of the records of the individual concerned.



      __________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)                                         AR20080018373



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080018373



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1