RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:         24 FEBRUARY 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040004443


      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:

|     |Ms. Yolanda Maldonado             |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Roland Weaver                 |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Jonathon Rost                 |     |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 award of the Purple Heart, Combat Infantryman
Badge, and the Army Good Conduct Medal.

2.  The applicant states he was put on the front line in Vietnam shortly
after his arrival and has not been right since that time as a result of his
wounds.  He states that he was told that the awards would be mailed to him.

3.  The applicant provides copies of medical documents associated with his
disability processing.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
which occurred on 31 January 1969.  The application submitted in this case
is dated
9 July 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 13 November 1967.  He was trained as an
infantryman (11B).

4.  While undergoing training he qualified as an expert with the M-60
machine gun and was awarded the associated badge and component bar.  Orders
issued at Fort McClellan, Alabama, confirmed the award, but the information
was omitted from his separation document.

5.  In April 1968 he was assigned to Vietnam and on 10 May 1968 he assumed
duties with Company D, 1st Battalion, 52nd Infantry.

6.  A Western Union Telegram, medical records available to the Board, and
an entry in item 20 (wounds) on his Department of the Army Form 20
(Enlisted Qualification Record) confirm that the applicant was wounded as a
result of hostile action on 20 May 1968.  He sustained multiple fragment
wounds to various parts of his body from an enemy mine.

7.  The applicant was medically evacuated from Vietnam and on 31 January
1969 he was discharged and his name was placed on the Temporary Disability
Retired List.  There is no indication that he was ever awarded the Purple
Heart, Combat Infantryman Badge, or an Army Good Conduct Medal.

8.  On 31 May 1972 his name was removed form the Temporary Disability
Retired List and he was permanently retired with a 90 percent disability
rating.

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that the Purple
Heart is awarded for wounds sustained as a result of hostile action.
Substantiating evidence must be provided to verify that the wound was the
result of hostile action, the wound must have required treatment by a
medical officer, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of
official record.

10.  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.

11.  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.  All of the applicant’s conduct and
efficiency ratings were excellent and there is no indication of any
disciplinary actions in his file.

12.  A review of Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and
Campaign Participation Credit Register) notes the applicant’s unit was
credited with participating in one designated campaign period (Vietnam
Counteroffensive Phase IV) during the applicant’s period of assignment.
One bronze service star on the Vietnam Service Medal, which is recorded on
his separation document, should reflect his campaign participation.  The
unit was also awarded a Meritorious Unit Commendation and the Republic of
Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm, during his tenure with the
organization.  The unit awards were also omitted from his separation
document.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence confirms that the applicant was wounded as a result of
hostile action on 20 May 1968 and as such, is entitled to an award of the
Purple Heart.

2.  The evidence also shows that the applicant met the qualification
requirements for award of the Combat Infantryman Badge.  His records should
be corrected accordingly.

3.  The applicant completed a qualifying period of service for award of the
Army Good Conduct Medal on 31 January 1969.  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 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 13 November 1967 through
31 January 1969.

4.  The applicant qualified as an expert with the M-60 machine gun and was
awarded the associated badge and component bar.  His separation document
should be corrected to reflect that information.

5.  The applicant is also entitled to an award of the Meritorious Unit
Commendation, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with
Palm, and a bronze service star on his Vietnam Service Medal.

BOARD VOTE:

__YM ___  ___RW__  ___JR __  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 awarding him the Purple Heart for wounds sustained on 20 May
1968;


      b.  by awarding him the Combat Infantryman Badge and the Army Good
Conduct Medal;


      c.  by showing that he qualified as an expert with the M-60 machine
gun and was awarded the associated badge and component bar; and


      d.  by showing that he is entitled to a Meritorious Unit Commendation,
the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm, and a
bronze service star on his Vietnam Service Medal.







                            ___ Yolanda Maldonado_______
                                      CHAIRPERSON















                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040004443                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050224                                |
|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]