IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  14 October 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140001356 


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 award of the Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) and the Bronze Star Medal (BSM).  

2.  He states that upon leaving the Republic of Vietnam (RVN), he was promised the ARCOM for his participation in Lam Son 719 and consideration for the BSM for the same campaign.

3.  He provides a self-authored statement.

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 (RA) on 26 June 1969.  He served in the RVN from 24 August 1970 to 23 August 1971.

3.  His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) (only pages 1 and 4 are available) and DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record - Part II) do not include entries for award of the ARCOM and BSM.  

4.  He was honorably discharged on 15 December 1971 for immediate reenlistment.  The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time does not show award of the ARCOM or BSM.

5.  He reenlisted in the RA on 16 December 1971 and he was honorably discharged on 15 December 1977.  The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time does not show award of the ARCOM and BSM.  

6.  His service record is void of evidence which shows he recommended for or awarded the ARCOM and BSM.  

7.  He provided a self-authored statement in which he states:

	a.  after 42 years after serving in Vietnam, he is still without commendations and awards that were promised before his departure from the RVN.  

	b.  during his tenure in the RVN during August 1970 to August 1971, he participated in Lam Son 719 assigned to the 337th Signal Company, 63rd Signal Battalion, 1st Signal Brigade in providing communications support for this operation (May 1971 to July 1971).  The Noncommissioned Officer in Charge (NCOIC) of their team recommended the entire team for the ARCOM and everyone, with the exception of him, received this award.  He believes that the company clerk submitted his own name [for award] instead of his name.  

	c.  the company commander with the 101st Airborne Division told the NCOIC that he should be put in for the BSM for meritorious service for maintaining constant and reliable communications during heavy enemy fire.  

	d.  at the time of his departure, he was assured that he would receive the ARCOM and a BSM, of which he has received neither.  

	e.  during his career with the military, he brought this subject up to his various commanders and each time he was told that they would look into the matter, but he never received a response.  He hopes that somewhere his files would reflect these awards and that he may receive what is long overdue.

8.  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 award of the ARCOM and BSM pertaining to the applicant

9.  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.

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 states the BSM is awarded in time of war for heroism and for meritorious achievement or service, not involving participation in aerial flight, in connection with military operations against an armed enemy, or while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party.  As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required.  

11.  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.

12.  The request, 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.



DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that he was promised the ARCOM for his participation in Lam Son 719 and consideration for the BSM for the same campaign was carefully considered.  However, his service record does not include any recommendations or orders for award of the ARCOM and BSM.

2.  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence on which to award him the ARCOM and BSM. 

3.  While the available evidence is insufficient for awarding the applicant an ARCOM and BSM, this in no way affects his right to pursue his claim for the ARCOM and BSM 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 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)                                         AR20140001356





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140001356



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1