BOARD DATE: 28 August 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130022340 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 Meritorious Unit Commendation. 2. The applicant states his unit, initially the 519th Transportation Battalion, and then the 313th and 569th, received the Meritorious Unit Commendation for service in Thailand. This award is not reflected in his records. He served during multiple campaigns and he was also part of a classified unit known as Igloo White from December 1966 to December 1969. 3. The applicant provides his DD Form 214. 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's records show he was inducted into the Army of the United States on 24 October 1966. He was discharged on 27 October 1966 and enlisted in the Regular Army on 28 October 1966. 3. He completed basic combat and advanced individual training and he was awarded military occupational specialty 51L (Refrigeration Specialist). 4. He served in Thailand from on or about 22 March 1968 to on or about 14 March 1969. He was assigned to the 313th Transportation Company. 5. He was honorably released from active duty in the rank/grade of specialist five (SP5)/E-5 on 28 July 1969. He completed 2 years, 9 months, and 5 days of total active service. His DD Form 214 shows the: * National Defense Service Medal * Vietnam Campaign Medal * Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar 6. Department of the Army (DA) Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) is 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, the Grenada Operation, and the period of service subsequent to the Vietnam Conflict up to September 1987. a. This pamphlet does not show the 313th Transportation Company was cited for award of the Meritorious Unit Commendation. b. This pamphlet does not show a listing for the 519th Transportation Battalion; however, it does show the 519th Transportation Detachment was cited for award of the Meritorious Unit Commendation for service from 1 July 1966 to 31 December 1967 by DA General Orders Number 17, dated 1969 and from 1 July to 31 December 1968 by DA General Orders Number 37, dated 1970. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's records show he served with the 313th Transportation Company in Thailand from on or about 22 March 1968 to on or about 14 March 1969. This unit was not cited for award of the Meritorious Unit Commendation or any other unit awards. As a result, there is insufficient evidence to award the applicant this award. 2. He contends he was assigned to the 519th Transportation Battalion. It was the 519th Transportation Detachment - not Battalion - that was cited for award of the Meritorious Unit Commendation. Either way, he did not provide any documentary evidence and his records contain none to confirm his assignment or attachment to this unit. 3. He contends he was assigned to a classified outfit known as Igloo White. Unfortunately, this Board has no access to classified documents. If the applicant is able to submit a declassified version of his assignment orders to this outfit, he may resubmit his application for consideration of any awards this specific unit may have received. 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) AR20130022340 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130022340 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1