IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 14 January 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150007496 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, in effect, correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show he was awarded or authorized the Meritorious Unit Commendation (MUC) and other awards to which he is entitled. 2. The applicant states he was reassigned to the 8th Radio Research Unit (RRU) on 8 September 1964, after which they received the MUC. He wonders what other additional awards he may be entitled to that he is not aware of. 3. The applicant provides copies of his DD Form 214 and the following: * LO (Letter Order) 9-19-64, issued by Headquarters, 3rd RRU on 8 September 1964, subject: Change of Station Orders * Special Orders Number 220, issued by Headquarters, 3rd RRU on 4 December 1964 * Special Orders Number 4, issued by Headquarters, U.S. Army Personnel Center, Oakland, California on 4 January 1965 * General Orders Number 1123, issued by Headquarters, United States Army Vietnam (USARV) on 15 March 1967 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 22 January 1962. He completed his initial entry training and was awarded military occupational specialty 058.10 (Morse Interceptor). 3. His DA Form 24 (Service Record) shows in: * Section 4 (Chronological Record of Military Service), he was assigned to the 3rd RRU from 16 March 1964 to 31 October 1964, followed by assignment to the 8th RRU from 1 November 1964 to 2 January 1965 * Section 5 (Service Outside Continental United States), he served in the Republic of Vietnam from 14 March 1964 to 2 January 1965 4. General Orders Number 1123, issued by USARV on 15 March 1967, awarded the MUC to the 8th RRU for exceptional meritorious achievement in the performance of outstanding service in the Republic of Vietnam, during the period November 1964 to June 1966. 5. He was honorably released from active duty and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve (Control Group) on 4 January 1965. His DD Form 214 shows he completed 2 years, 11 months, and 13 days of net active service. He was awarded or authorized the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (Vietnam) and the Sharpshooter [Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar] (Rifle M-1). 6. He provides an order showing he was assigned from the 3rd RRU to the 8th RRU, orders transferring him from the 8th RRU to the U.S. Transfer Station, Oakland, California, and orders releasing him from active duty. 7. A review of his record indicates he is entitled to additional awards that are not shown on his DD Form 214. 8. There is no indication in his available record that shows he was awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM). Section 4 of his DA Form 24 shows he received all "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings throughout his service. There is no evidence in the applicant's available record of misconduct or any convictions by courts-martial, and there is no evidence that any of his immediate commanders took action to deny him his initial award of the AGCM. 9. Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Awards), in effect at the time, stated the ACGM was awarded for each 3 years of continuous enlisted active Federal military service completed on or after 27 August 1940; and for the first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June 1950 of less than 3 years but more than 1 year. The enlisted person must have had all "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings, and he/she could not have been convicted by court-martial. 10. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning individual and unit military awards. a. The National Defense Service Medal is awarded for honorable active service for any period between 27 July 1950 and 27 July 1954, 1 January 1961 and 14 August 1974, 2 August 1990 and 30 November 1995, and 11 September 2001 and a date to be determined. b. The Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal is awarded for qualifying service after 1 July 1958 in military operations within a specific geographic area during a specified time period. It states individuals qualified for the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal for service in Vietnam from 1 July 1958 and 3 July 1965 (inclusive) shall remain qualified for that medal. Upon request, the Vietnam Service Medal may be awarded in lieu of the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, but the regulation requires that the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal be removed from the records of the individual (emphasis added). No person will be entitled to both awards for Vietnam service. c. The Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960) was awarded by the Government of Vietnam to all members of the Armed Forces of the United States for qualifying service in Vietnam during the period 1 March 1961 through 28 March 1973. Qualifying service included assignment in Vietnam for 6 months or more. 11. Department of the Army General Orders (DAGO) Number 8, dated 1974, announced award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation to Headquarters, U.S. Military Assistance Command and its subordinate units, for service during the period 8 February 1962 to 28 March 1973. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's request for correction of his DD Form 214 to show the MUC and other entitled awards was carefully considered. 2. The evidence of record shows he served in the 8th RRU from 1 November 1964 to 2 January 1965 during his service in the Republic of Vietnam. General Orders Number 1123 awarded the 8th RRU the MUC for service in the Republic of Vietnam from November 1964 to June 1966. This award is not shown on his DD Form 214. 3. He served honorably from 22 January 1962 to 4 January 1965. His record shows he received all "excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings throughout his service. There is no evidence in the applicant's available record of misconduct or any convictions by courts-martial, and there is no evidence that any of his immediate commanders took action to deny him his initial award of the AGCM. However, the AGCM is not listed as an authorized award on his DD Form 214. 4. He served a qualifying period of honorable service from 22 January 1962 to 4 January 1965 for award of the National Defense Service Medal. However, the National Defense Service Medal is not listed as an authorized award on his DD Form 214. 5. He served a qualifying period of service for the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960). However, this foreign service medal is not shown as an authorized award on his DD Form 214. 6. DAGO Number 8, dated 1974, cited all units in the Republic of Vietnam for award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation during his period of service in the Republic of Vietnam. However, this foreign service medal in not shown as an authorized award on his DD Form 214. 7. For the applicant's information, he may request the Vietnam Service Medal in lieu of the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal for his service in the Republic of Vietnam; however, since no person will be entitled to both awards for Vietnam service, the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal would be removed from his records. BOARD VOTE: ____X___ ____X___ ____X___ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for 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 22 January 1962 to 4 January 1965 and b. amending his DD Form 214 by adding the: * Army Good Conduct Medal (1st Award) * National Defense Service Medal * Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960) * Meritorious Unit Commendation * Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm 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) AR20100015543 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150007496 5 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1