BOARD DATE:	    27 October 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110006453 


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 military records to show award of the Combat Action Ribbon (CAR), Navy Unit Commendation (NUC), and the Presidential Unit Citation (PUC).

2.  The applicant states:

	a.  He disagrees with the Board's determination and argues that he was with the 3d Battalion, 60th Infantry Regiment (River Raiders), prior to 4 March 1968 making him eligible for award of the PUC.

	b.  He contends he arrived in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) on 22 February 1968 and was assigned the next day to the 9th Infantry Division.  He was in training for 3 days with Headquarters, 9th Infantry Division, and then was sent by plane to the 3d Battalion, 60th Infantry Regiment.  This puts him with the 3d Battalion, 60th Infantry Regiment, on 27 February 1968.

	c.  He also contends he was further assigned from the Headquarters, 3d Battalion, 60th Infantry Regiment, to Company E of the same battalion.

	d.  He further contends that paperwork and records were not always expedient or accurate.

3.  The applicant provides copies of:

* CAR eligibility requirements
* NUC Citation
* DA Form 1 (Morning Report) for Company E, 3d Battalion, 60th Infantry Regiment, dated 7 March 1968
* DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record), pages 2 and 3
* Air Medal Citation
* General Orders Number 11344, Headquarters, 9th Infantry Division, dated 16 December 1968
* DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge)
* History of 2d Brigade, 9th Infantry Division, five pages, undated and unsigned
* extract of award of the PUC

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 AR20100000974 on 20 July 2010.

2.  The applicant provides the following additional documents requiring consideration by the Board:

	a.  DA Form 1;

	b.  Air Medal Citation and general orders; and

	c.  5-page narrative history of 2d Brigade, 9th Infantry Division.

3.  In the original Record of Proceedings, the Board determined the available evidence was not sufficient to support award of the CAR, NUC, or PUC.

4.  Special Orders Number 63, Headquarters, 9th Infantry Division, dated 3 March 1968, reassigned the applicant from the U.S. Army Vietnam Transit Detachment to Company E, 3d Battalion, 60th Infantry Regiment, effective 6 March 1968.

5.  The applicant's DA Form 20 shows:

	a.  in item 31 (Foreign Service) his arrival in the RVN on 22 February 1968 and

	b.  in item 38 (Record of Assignments) his assignment as an infantryman indirect fire crewman with Company E, 3d Battalion, 60th Infantry Regiment, effective 6 March 1968.

6.  The CAR eligibility requirements provided by the applicant clearly state the CAR is awarded to members of the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps.  It further states that members of the Coast Guard, when under control of the U.S. Navy, may also be awarded this ribbon.  Former members of the U.S. Army who received the Combat Infantryman Badge in such status are, upon submission of evidence to their Naval or Marine commanding officer, authorized to wear the CAR.

7.  The extract of award of the PUC as provided by the applicant clearly states the President of the United States awarded the 3d Battalion, 60th Infantry Regiment, the PUC for extraordinary heroism in action against a hostile force during the period 29 January to 4 March 1968 during the Tet Offensive and immediately thereafter.

8.  The 5-page history of 2d Brigade, 9th Infantry Division, provided by the applicant appears to cover the period from on or about 2 May 1967 to mid-April 1969.  This document mentions "Old Reliables of the 3d Battalion, 60th Infantry" and "companies from the 3d Battalion, 60th Infantry."  However, it does not state clearly that Company E, 3d Battalion, 60th Infantry Regiment, was a part of the Mobile Riverine Force.

9.  The NUC Citation provided by the applicant cites the River Assault Flotilla One for exceptional meritorious service during the period from 5 March 1968 to 24 January 1969 while operating with friendly forces engaged in armed conflict against communist aggressor forces in the Mekong Delta region of the RVN.  The flotilla provided gunfire support to the troops of the 9th Infantry Division.  The citation further states, "all personnel attached to and serving with the River Assault Flotilla One during the above-designated period or any part thereof are hereby authorized to wear the NUC Ribbon."

10.  The Morning Report provided by the applicant shows he was assigned not joined to Company E, 3d Battalion, 60th Infantry, intransit from the U.S. Army Vietnam Transient Detachment, effective 7 March 1968

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends his military records should be corrected to show award of the CAR, NUC, and PUC.

2.  The applicant contends he was further assigned from Headquarters, 3d Battalion, 60th Infantry Regiment, to Company E of the same battalion.  However, the actual reassignment orders clearly show he was reassigned from the U.S. Army Vietnam Transit Detachment to Company E, 3d Battalion, 60th Infantry Regiment, effective 6 March 1968.  The Morning Report he provided shows he was assigned to the unit effective 7 March 1968.

3.  The CAR is only authorized for award to Naval, Marine, or Coast Guard personnel.  There is no available evidence showing the applicant ever served as a member of any of these organizations.  Therefore, he is not authorized this ribbon and his request should be denied.

4.  The NUC Citation clearly states all personnel attached to and serving with the River Assault Flotilla One during the period 5 March 1968 to 24 January 1969 are authorized to wear the NUC.  Unfortunately, the available evidence does not sufficiently show the applicant's unit was included.

5.  The evidence provided by the applicant clearly shows the PUC was awarded to the 3d Battalion, 60th Infantry Regiment, for the period 29 January to 4 March 1968 for heroism during the Tet Offensive and immediately thereafter.  However, his military records and the evidence he provided show he was not assigned to this organization until 6/7 March 1968.  The applicant's argument that he was with the 3d Battalion, 60th Infantry Regiment, prior to 4 March 1968 is not sufficiently supported by official documentation; therefore, this portion of his request should be denied.

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 the overall merits of this case are 

insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20100000974, dated 20 July 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)                                         AR20110006453



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110006453



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1