BOARD DATE:	  21 June 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100027823 


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 of his earlier request for correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show award of the Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM).

2.  The applicant states the original Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) Record of Proceedings (ROP) contains the following errors:

	a.  The ROP stated he entered the Army in pay grade E-1; however, he had prior service in the U.S. Navy and he entered the Army in pay grade E-2.

	b.  The ROP stated he was promoted to specialist five, pay grade E-5 while serving in Germany; however, he was promoted to specialist four while in Germany, and to specialist five while in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN).

	c.  The ROP indicated he was assigned to B Battery, 1st Battalion, 44th Artillery Regiment (B, 1/44th Artillery) when he arrived in the RVN, when in fact, this assignment did not occur until November 1971.

3.  The applicant contends his company commander informed him that he had been put in for award of the ARCOM in December 1970 or January 1971, but he never received it because he was being transferred to the RVN.  He further contends that his company commander based the recommendation for this award on three letters of commendation/appreciation he received while serving with Headquarters and Headquarters Company and Company A, 71st Maintenance Battalion, located in Europe.
4.  The applicant provides copies of his Enlistment Contract, orders for promotion to specialist four and specialist five, and three letters.

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 AR 20100007805, on 21 September 2010.

2.  The original ROP indicates the applicant was authorized award of the Army Good Conduct Medal, RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, Vietnam Service Medal with three bronze service stars, and the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar.  It also shows the evidence was insufficient to warrant award of the Bronze Star Medal, ARCOM, or Presidential Unit Citation.  Furthermore, it was determined that there were no provisions for granting his request to show all of his duty assignments in the RVN on his DD Form 214.

3.  The three letters the applicant submitted are new evidence that requires Board consideration.

4.  The applicant's statements concerning the pay grade he held when he entered the U.S. Army; when and where he was promoted to specialist four and specialist five; and the date of his assignment to B, 1/44th Artillery are all essentially correct.

5.  The letters of commendation/appreciation the applicant provided commend him and congratulate him for being chosen Soldier of the Quarter for the 71st Maintenance Battalion (twice) in May and October 1970.  He was also chosen as the colonel's orderly in August 1970 for excelling in his appearance and ability to answer questions while on guard duty.

6.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states the ARCOM may be 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.  As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required.





7.  Title 10 of the U.S. Code, section 1130 (10 USC 1130) provides the legal authority for consideration of proposals for decorations not previously submitted in a timely fashion.  Upon the request of a Member of Congress, the Secretary concerned shall review a proposal for the award of or upgrading of a decoration.  Based upon such review, the Secretary shall determine the merits of approving the award.

8.  The request, with a DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award), must be submitted through a Member of Congress to:  U.S. Army Human Resources Command, 1600 Spearhead Division Avenue, Department 100, Fort Knox, KY 40122-5100.  The unit must be clearly identified, along with the period of assignment and the recommended award.  A narrative of the actions or period for which recognition is being requested must accompany the DA Form 638.  Requests should be supported by sworn affidavits, eyewitness statements, certificates, and related documents.  Supporting evidence is best provided by commanders, leaders, and fellow Soldiers who had personal knowledge of the facts relative to the request.  The burden and costs for researching and assembling supporting documentation rest with the applicant.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends his company commander based the recommendation for award of the ARCOM on the three letters he provided for review.  He also identified errors in the original ROP concerning his pay grade when he entered the Army and where he was assigned when he was promoted.

2.  A review of the original ROP and the applicant's records confirmed the items he identified were indeed in error.  While these mistakes are unfortunate, they did not result in any misunderstanding of the relevant issues or injustice to the applicant.  Accordingly, they do not require corrective action.

3.  There are no general orders showing the applicant was awarded the ARCOM.  The three letters of commendation/appreciation provided by the applicant clearly show he had been an excellent Soldier.  However, they do not indicate the commander recommended him for a personal decoration.

4.  While the available evidence is insufficient for awarding the applicant an ARCOM, this in no way affects his right to pursue his claim for the award by submitting a request through his Member of Congress under the provisions of 
10 USC 1130.



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 AR 20100007805, on 21 September 2010.





      _______ _   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)                                         AR20100027823



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100027823



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1