RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:         01 MARCH 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040003655


      I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record
of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in
the case of the above-named individual.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Ms. Deborah L. Brantley           |     |Senior Analyst       |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Walter Morrison               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Robert Duecaster              |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Antonio Uribe                 |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests that his records be corrected to reflect award
of the Purple Heart.

2.  The applicant states that his award of the Purple Heart is not
reflected on his separation document and he needs the information recorded
to receive “service benefits.”

3.  The applicant provides a copy of a May 1969 Purple Heart award
certificate awarding him the Purple Heart for wounds sustained on 11 April
1969.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
which occurred on 24 March 1970.  The application submitted in this case is
dated
7 June 2004.

2.  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 allows the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file
within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines that it
would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will
conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in
the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  Records available to the Board indicate that the applicant was inducted
and entered active duty on 25 March 1968.  He was trained as an
infantryman, specialty 11B.

4.  While undergoing training, the applicant qualified as an expert with
the M-60 machine gun and as a sharpshooter with the M-14 rifle.  He was
awarded the associated badges and component bars, but the information was
omitted from his separation document.

5.  In August 1968 the applicant was assigned to Vietnam.  He performed
duties as an infantryman and was assigned to the 1st Squadron, 1st Cavalry
Division.




6.  On 22 September 1968 the applicant was wounded as a result of hostile
action and awarded the Purple Heart.  Orders issued by the Americal
Division on 20 October 1968 confirmed the applicant’s award.   It was,
however, omitted from his separation document.

7.  According to a roster of individuals reported as combat casualties
during the Vietnam War, the applicant was wounded again on 26 March 1969.
Although the wound is confirmed on the casualty roster, his records do not
contain any orders awarding him a second Purple Heart.

8.  On 11 April 1969 the applicant was wounded a third time as a result of
hostile action.  His record does contain a copy of orders awarding him the
Purple Heart with second oak leaf cluster.  The orders were issued by the
Americal Division on 11 May 1969.  The applicant’s separation document does
not reflect entitlement to any awards of the Purple Heart.

9.  As a result of the applicant’s 11 April 1969 wounds he was evacuated
from Vietnam and ultimately returned to duty in Korea.  However, by June
1969 he was reassigned to Vietnam as a gunner with the 3rd Battalion, 32nd
Infantry.  On
1 September 1969 he departed Vietnam, having been awarded an Army
Commendation Medal for meritorious achievement.  Orders issued by the
Americal Division confirmed the award, but it too, was also omitted from
the applicant’s separation document.

10.  The applicant completed his military service at Fort Carson, Colorado.
 He was released from active duty, in pay grade E-4, with an honorable
characterization of service.

11.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 states that there are basically three
requirements for award of the Combat Infantryman Badge.  The Soldier must
be an infantryman (11 series specialty), assigned to an infantry unit
during such time as the unit is engaged in active ground combat, and must
have actively participated in such ground combat.

12.  Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time when the service member
was discharged, required that throughout a qualifying period of service for
award of the Good Conduct Medal the enlisted person must have had all
“excellent” conduct and efficiency ratings and no convictions by a court-
martial.  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.  With the
publication of the new Army Regulation 672-5-1, in 1974, the requirement
for all excellent conduct and efficiency ratings was dropped and an
individual was required to show that he/she willingly complied with the
demands of the military environment, had been loyal and obedient, and
faithfully supported the goals of his organization and the Army.  Today,
Army Regulation 600-8-22, which replaced Army Regulation 672-5-1, notes
that there is no automatic entitlement to the Army Good Conduct Medal and
disqualification must be justified.  Current practice requires that the
commander provide written notice of nonfavorable consideration and permits
the individual to respond.

13.  The applicant’s conduct and efficiency ratings throughout his military
service were excellent, and he had no record of any disciplinary actions or
incidents of misconduct.

14.  A review of Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and
Campaign Participation Credit Register) notes the applicant would have
participated in four designated campaigns (Vietnam Counteroffensive Phases
V and VI, TET 69 Counteroffensive, and Vietnam Summer-Fall 1969) during his
tours of duty in Vietnam.  Four bronze service stars on the Vietnam Service
Medal, which is recorded on his separation document, should reflect his
campaign participation, vice the one bronze service star currently shown.
The 1st Squadron, 1st Cavalry was also awarded a Valorous Unit Award and
the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm during his
tenure with that organization.  The unit awards were also omitted from his
separation document.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence confirms that the applicant was not only awarded the one
Purple Heart for which he submitted evidence, but in actuality he was
awarded three awards of the Purple Heart.  None of the awards were recorded
on his separation document.

2.  The evidence also shows that the applicant qualified as an expert with
the M-60 machine gun and as a sharpshooter with the M-14 rifle and was
awarded the associated badges and component bars, that he was awarded an
Army Commendation Medal, and that he is entitled to four bronze service
stars on his Vietnam Service Medal, vice the one currently recorded, a
Valorous Unit Award and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit
Citation with Palm.  His records should be corrected to reflect that
information.

3.  The evidence shows that the applicant was an infantryman, assigned to
an infantry element while in Vietnam.  The fact that he was wounded in
action on three separate occasions is evidence of his ground combat.  As
such, the applicant met the eligibility requirements for award of the
Combat Infantryman Badge and it would be appropriate and in the interest of
justice to award him that badge.

4.  The applicant completed a qualifying period of service for award of the
Army Good Conduct Medal on 24 March 1970.  There is no evidence his
commander ever disqualified him from receiving the award and no evidence of
any misconduct which would justify denying him the award.  In view of the
foregoing, the Board concludes that the applicant met the basic
qualifications for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal and it would be
appropriate and in the interest of equity to award him that decoration for
the period 25 March 1968 through
24 March 1970.

BOARD VOTE:

___WM__  ___RD __  ___AU __  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant
a recommendation for relief and to excuse failure to timely file.  As a
result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the
individual concerned be corrected:

      a.  by showing that the applicant is entitled to three awards of the
Purple Heart, for wounds sustained on 22 September 1968, 26 March 1969, and

11 April 1969;

      b.  by showing that he qualified as an expert with the M-60 machine
gun and as a sharpshooter with the M-14 rifle and was awarded the
associated badges and component bars, that he was awarded an Army
Commendation Medal, and that he is entitled to four bronze service stars on
his Vietnam Service Medal, vice the one currently recorded, a Valorous Unit
Award and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm;


      c.  by awarding him the Combat Infantryman Badge; and


      d.  by awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal.





                            _____Walter Morrison_________
                                      CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040003655                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050301                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT                                   |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |107.00                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]