RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:           10 March 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040002080


      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             |
|     |Mr. Joseph A. Adriance            |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. John N. Slone                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Lester Echols                 |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Carmen Duncan                 |     |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, in effect, that the Combat Infantryman Badge
(CIB) be added to his record and separation document (DD Form 214).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was awarded the CIB, but it
was never annotated on his DD Form 214.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 in support of his
application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
that occurred on 31 August 1998.  The application submitted in this case is
dated
22 April 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 limitation 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.  The applicant’s record shows that he initially enlisted in the Regular
Army and entered active duty in an enlisted status on 30 January 1969.  He
was trained in, awarded and served in military occupational specialty (MOS)
11D (Armor Intelligence Specialist).

4.  On 19 January 1972, he was honorably discharged after completing
2 years, 11 months and 20 days of active military service.  The DD Form 214
he was issued for this period of active duty service confirms he served in
the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) from 18 July 1966 through 18 January 1970.
It also shows that during this period, he earned the Army Commendation
Medal (ARCOM), National Defense Service Medal (NDSM), Vietnam Service Medal
(VSM), Vietnam Campaign Medal (VCM) and Expert Qualification Badge with
Rifle Bar.  The applicant authenticated this separation document with his
signature in Item 32 (Signature of Person Being Transferred or Discharged).

5.  On 30 May 1974, the applicant reentered active duty in an enlisted
status and was trained and served in MOS 91B (Medical Specialist).  He
continued to serve on active duty in the medical field in an enlisted
status until being appointed a warrant officer one (WO1), Physician
Assistant (PA) in the Medical Corps (MC) in March 1990.

6.  The DD Form 214 the applicant was issued on 15 March 1990, upon his
release from active duty (REFRAD) to accept his warrant officer
appointment, shows he earned the following awards:  Army Service Ribbon
(ASR), Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM) 4th Award, Army Achievement Medal
(AAM), Noncommissioned Officer Professional Development Ribbon (NCOPDR)
with Numeral 3, NDSM and Expert Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar.  The
applicant authenticated this separation document with his signature in Item
21 (Signature of Member Being Separated).

7.  On 13 May 1992, he was appointed a second lieutenant PA in the MC.  His
Officer Record Brief, dated 10 April 1997, shows that he earned the
following awards:  Meritorious Service Medal (MSM), ARCOM (2), AAM, AGCM
(5), NDSM (2), NCOPDR (Numeral 3) and Overseas Service Ribbon (OSR).

8.  On 31 August 1998, the applicant was honorably REFRAD for the purpose
of voluntary retirement.  The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time
confirms he held the rank of captain and had completed a total of 24 years,
3 months and
1 day of active military service.  This document further shows that he
earned the following awards during his active duty tenure:  MSM, ARCOM (2),
AAM, AGCM (5), NDSM (2), NCOPDR (Numeral 3), ASR and OSR.  The applicant
authenticated this document with his signature in Item 21 (Signature of
Member Being Separated).

9.  The applicant’s record contains no indication that he served in a
combat area subsequent to his service in the RVN.

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy and
criteria concerning individual military awards.  Chapter 8 contains
guidance on award of combat badges.  It states, in pertinent part, that the
CIB is awarded to infantry officers and to enlisted and warrant officer
personnel who have an infantry MOS.  They must have served in active ground
combat while assigned or attached to an infantry unit of brigade,
regimental or smaller size.  The Awards Branch of the Human Resources
Command (HRC) has advised, in similar cases, that during the Vietnam era
the CIB was awarded only to enlisted individuals who held and served in MOS
11B, 11C, 11F, 11G, or 11H.  MOS 11D was not included in the list of
qualifying infantry MOSs.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s claim of entitlement to the CIB was carefully
considered.  However, by regulation, in order to qualify for the CIB, there
must be evidence confirming a member served in combat with a qualifying
infantry unit.  Further, an enlisted Soldier must have held an infantry
MOS, which according to Army HRC awards officials included MOS 11B, 11C,
11F, 11G AND 11H.

2.  The applicant’s record is void of any indication of what unit he served
with in the RVN.  Further, it confirms he held the MOS 11D, which was not a
qualifying infantry MOS for CIB purposes during the Vietnam era.  The
record also gives no indication that the applicant served in a combat area
subsequent to his service in the RVN.  Therefore, the regulatory criteria
necessary to support award of the CIB has not been satisfied in this case.


3.  The record also includes three separation documents issued to the
applicant on 19 January 1972, 15 March 1990 and 31 August 1998,
respectively.  The authorized awards earned by the applicant during these
periods that were entered on the DD Forms 214 did not include the CIB.
Further, the applicant authenticated each of these documents with his
signature, thereby, verifying that the information they contained, to
include the awards listed, was correct at the time each of the separation
documents was prepared and issued.

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 31 August 1998.  Therefore, the time
for him to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired
on 30 August 2001.  However, he failed to file within the 3-year statute of
limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation or evidence to
show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse failure to
timely file in this case.



BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___JNS _  ___CD __  ___LE___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that 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.

2.  As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence
provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year
statute of limitations prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient
basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for
correction of the records of the individual concerned.




            ____John N. Slone_______
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040002080                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005/03/10                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1998/08/31                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 600-8-24                             |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |Retirement                              |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.  46   |107.0000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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