IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  1 July 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130018917 


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 award of the Army Commendation Medal with oak leaf cluster, the Army Good Conduct Medal      (1st Award), and a Presidential Unit Citation.

2.  The applicant states he should receive the Presidential Unit Citation for his service with the 588th Engineer Battalion in Cambodia. 

3.  The applicant provides:

* DD Form 214
* DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record)
* 2 Army Commendation Certificates
* 2 Army Commendation Citations
* Certificate of Achievement
* Honorable Discharge Certificate
* a memorandum
* Orders P08-812993

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 5 December 1968.  

3.  General Orders Number 1275, issued by Headquarters, U.S. Army Support Command, dated 1 September 1970, awarded him the Army Commendation Medal for the period 7 May to 28 June 1970.

4.  His record shows he served in the Republic of Vietnam with the 510th Engineer Company for the periods 24 July 1969 to 24 July 1970 and 25 August 1970 to 8 July 1971.

5.  Item 38 (Record of Assignments) of his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows he received all "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings throughout his service.  His record does not contain any derogatory information or a commander's disqualification that would have precluded him from being recommended for or awarded the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.

6.  On 8 July 1971, he was honorably released from active duty as an overseas returnee and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group (Reinforcement).  His DD Form 214 shows he was awarded or authorized the:

* National Defense Service Medal
* Vietnam Service Medal
* Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960)
* Army Commendation Medal

7.  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.

8.  The applicant provides and his record contains:

   a.  An Army Commendation Medal certificate and citation awarding him the Army Commendation Medal for meritorious service in the Republic of Vietnam for the period July 1970 to May 1971.  

   b.  A DA Form 2-1 which shows award of a second Army Commendation Medal in May 1971.
   
   c.  A Certificate of Achievement for meritorious service in support of combat operations in Cambodia and the Republic of Vietnam, which states the applicant moved with the second maintenance platoon, 510th Engineer Company, on        7 May 1970, to Katum, Republic of Vietnam, to support the 588th Engineer Battalion (Combat).

9.  Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Awards), in effect at the time, provides that the Army Good Conduct Medal is awarded to individuals who have completed a qualified period of active duty enlisted service.  This period is 3 years except in 
those cases when the period for the first award ends 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 General Orders Number 8, dated 1974, awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation to Headquarters, U.S. Military Assistance Command, and its subordinate units during the period 8 February 1962 to 28 March 1973 and to Headquarters, U.S. Army Vietnam, and its subordinate units during the period 20 July 1965 to 28 March 1973.

11.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards), paragraph 2-13, contains the regulatory guidance on the Vietnam Service Medal and states that a bronze service star is authorized with this award for each Republic of Vietnam campaign a member is credited with participating in.  A silver service star is authorized in lieu of five bronze service stars.  Appendix B shows that during his service in the Republic of Vietnam, participation credit was awarded for the following five campaigns:

* Vietnam Summer-Fall 1969 
* Vietnam Winter-Spring 1970
* Sanctuary Counteroffensive 
* Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase VII
* Consolidation I

12.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) was published to assist commanders and personnel officers in determining or establishing the eligibility of individual members for campaign participation credit, assault landing credit, and unit citation badges awarded during the Vietnam Conflict.  This pamphlet does not show that the unit to which the applicant was assigned, the 510th Engineer Company, was cited for award of the Presidential Unit Citation during his service with this unit or at any time during its service in Vietnam.  It also does not show that the 588th Engineer Company was awarded the Presidential Unit Citation.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's claim of entitlement to award the Army Commendation Medal with oak leaf cluster, the Army Good Conduct Medal, and the Presidential Unit Citation was carefully considered and found to have partial merit.

2.  General orders awarded him the Army Commendation Medal which is annotated on his DD Form 214.  Evidence contained in the applicant's records and further provided by the applicant corroborate award of the Army Commendation Medal with oak leaf cluster.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his DD Form 214 to show this award.  

3.  The available evidence shows the applicant received "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings at all of his active duty assignments and his record is void of any derogatory information or a unit commander's disqualification that would have precluded him from receiving the Army Good Conduct Medal.  Therefore, it would be appropriate to award him the Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award) for the period 5 December 1968 through 8 July 1971 and to correct his DD Form 214 to show this award.

4.  The applicant's unit was cited for award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation during his period of assignment.  Therefore, his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show this unit award.

5.  The evidence of record also confirms that based on the applicant's service and campaign participation in the Republic of Vietnam, he is entitled to one silver service star for wear with his previously-awarded Vietnam Service Medal.  Therefore, his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show the Vietnam Service Medal with one silver service star.

6.  The evidence of record shows he served with the 510th Engineer Company in Vietnam.  While it appears he may have also directly supported the 588th Engineer Battalion, the pertinent Army regulation does not show that these units were cited for award of the Presidential Unit Citation at any time during his period of service in Vietnam.  Additionally, there is no evidence he served with any other unit that was cited for award of the Presidential Unit Citation.  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to add this unit award on his DD Form 214.

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:

   a.  awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award) for the period 5 December 1968 through 8 July 1971;

	b.  deleting the Vietnam Service Medal from his DD Form 214; and

	c.  adding the following awards to his DD Form 214:

* Army Commendation Medal with oak leaf cluster
* Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award)
* Vietnam Service Medal with one silver service star
* Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation
 
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 award of the Presidential Unit Citation.  



      _______ _   __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)                                         AR20130018917





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130018917



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1