IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  25 August 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110003411 


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 correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show the:

* Army Commendation Medal
* Army Good Conduct Medal
* Presidential Unit Citation
* Any other awards and decorations

2.  The applicant states he received the Army Commendation Medal after he was discharged.  His certificate was signed on 13 December 1968.  He also believes his unit was awarded the Presidential Unit Citation.  

3.  The applicant provides a certificate showing award of the Army Commendation Medal.

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 enlisted in the Regular Army on 18 January 1966 and held military occupational specialty 95B (Military Police).  He served in Vietnam as follows:

* from 8 August 1966 to 7 August 1967; he was assigned to Company A, 1st Battalion, 12th Cavalry
* from 14 February to 23 April 1968; he was assigned to Company B, 2nd Battalion, 505th Infantry

3.  He was honorably released from active duty in the rank/grade of sergeant (SGT)/E-5 on 17 January 1969 and he was transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve to complete his remaining service obligation.  Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of his DD Form 214 shows the:

* National Defense Service Medal
* Vietnam Service Medal
* Vietnam Campaign Medal
* Parachutist Badge
* Combat Infantryman Badge
* Air Medal

4.  He submitted a certificate, dated 13 December 1968 which shows he was awarded the Army Commendation Medal for meritorious achievement in Vietnam from 14 February to 5 April 1968; however, he did not submit an accompanying order.  Additionally:

	a.  Item 41 (Awards and Decorations) of his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) does not show award of the Army Commendation Medal; 

   b.  His records do not contain general orders which authorized him award of the Army Commendation Medal; and

	c.  A review of the Awards and Decorations Computer-Assisted Retrieval System, an index of general orders issued during the Vietnam era between 1965 and 1973 maintained by the Military Awards Branch of the U.S. Army Human Resources Command, failed to reveal any orders for the Army Commendation Medal or him. 

5.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 states the Army Commendation Medal 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.

6.  Title 10, U.S. Code, section 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.

7.  The request, along with a DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award), must be submitted through a Member of Congress to:  Commander, U.S. Army Human Resources Command, ATTN:  AHRC-PDP-A, 1600 Spearhead Division Avenue, Fort Knox, KY  40122.  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.

8.  His records do not contain official orders awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal.  However, a review of his service record also shows no derogatory information that would disqualify him for the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.  Item 38 (Record of Assignments) of his DA Form 20 shows he received "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings during his military service (except on 14 July 1966 while awaiting travel to his Vietnam unit, he received an "unknown" rating).

9.  Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Awards), in effect at the time, provided that the Army Good Conduct Medal was awarded to individuals who completed a qualified period of active duty enlisted service.  This period was 3 years except in those cases when the period for the first award ended with the termination of a period of Federal military service.  The enlisted person must have had all "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings and no convictions by a court-martial.

10.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) shows during his service with the 1st Battalion 12th Cavalry in Vietnam, this unit was cited for awards of the:

* Presidential Unit Citation, for service from 2 to 3 October 1966, based on Department of the Army General Orders (DAGO) Number 47, dated 1968
* Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation for service from 9 August 1965 to 19 May 1969 based on DAGO Number 56, dated 1969

11.  A review of his records indicates his entitlement to additional awards which are not shown on his DD Form 214.

12.  Unit Orders Number 52, issued by Headquarters, 1st Battalion, 12th Cavalry, on 31 March 1967, awarded him the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Mortar Bar (81 mm).

13.  Item 29 (Qualifications in Arms) of his DA Form 20 shows he qualified sharpshooter with the M-14 rifle on 1 March 1966 and marksman with the pistol (.45 Caliber) on 18 March 1966.

14.  Appendix B of Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) shows during his service in Vietnam, participation credit was awarded for the below campaigns.  This same regulation states a bronze service star will be awarded for wear on the Vietnam Service Medal for participation in each campaign:

* Vietnamese Counteroffensive Phase; 1 July 1966 - 31 May 1967
* Vietnamese Counteroffensive Phase III; 1 June 1967 - 29 January 1968
* Tet Counteroffensive; 30 January - 1 April 1968
* Vietnamese Counteroffensive Phase IV; 2 April - 30 June 1968

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  He served honorably during the period 18 January 1966 through 17 January 1969.  He served in Vietnam, was awarded multiple combat awards, attained the rank/grade of SGT/E-5, and he received "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings throughout his military service.  His file contains no information that would have disqualified him for the Army Good Conduct Medal; therefore, it would be appropriate to award the applicant the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal and correct his DD Form 214 to show this award.

2.  General orders awarded his unit in Vietnam the Presidential Unit Citation and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation; therefore, his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show these unit awards.

3.  He was awarded the Vietnam Service Medal.  Additionally, he participated in four campaigns during his service in Vietnam.  Therefore, he is entitled to award of four bronze service stars to be affixed to his already-awarded Vietnam Service Medal.

4.  Unit orders awarded him the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Mortar Bar (81 mm) which is not shown on his DD Form 214; therefore, he is entitled to correction of his DD Form 214 to show this badge.

5.  He qualified sharpshooter with the M-14 rifle and marksman with the pistol (.45 Caliber).  Therefore, he is entitled to award of the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle (M-14) Bar and the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Pistol (.45 Caliber) and correction of his DD Form 214 to show both badges.

6.  With respect to the Army Commendation Medal, there is no evidence in his records and aside from the certificate he did not provide substantiating evidence that shows he was recommended for or awarded the Army Commendation Medal.  The governing Army regulation states that for personal decorations (which include the Army Commendation Medal), formal recommendation, approval through the chain of command, and announcement of orders are required.

7.  Although he claims he was awarded this medal after his return from Vietnam, in the absence of official orders, there is insufficient evidence to correct his records to show the Army Commendation Medal.  Nevertheless, if the applicant believes he is entitled to this medal, he has the right to pursue his claim for the Army Commendation Medal by submitting a request through his Member of Congress under the provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1130.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

____X____  ___X_____  ___X_____  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by:

* awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award) for exemplary behavior, efficiency, and fidelity during the period 18 January 1966 through 17 January 1969
* adding to item 24 of his DD Form 214 the:

* Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award)
* Presidential Unit Citation
* Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation
* Sharpshooter Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-14)
* Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Pistol Bar (.45 Caliber)
* Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Mortar Bar (81 mm)
* Four bronze service stars to be affixed to his already-awarded Vietnam Service Medal

2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to the Army Commendation Medal.



      _______ _   _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)                                         AR20110003411





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110003411



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1