RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:          14 September 2004
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2004100199


      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. Jessie B. Strickland          |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Mark D. Manning               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Karen A. Heinz                |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Robert L. Duecaster           |     |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 he be awarded the Combat Infantryman Badge
(CIB) and the Purple Heart.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was recommended for award of
the CIB by the senior advisor of the advisory team he served on in Vietnam
and that he was wounded in the face during an explosion and should have
been awarded the Purple Heart.  He goes on to state that he only has a scar
on his cheek to prove his claim.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of a personnel action form (DA Form 1049)
addressed from the senior advisor of Advisory Team #2 to the commander,
United States Military Assistance Command - Vietnam (USMACV) dated
16 January 1967, recommending that the applicant be awarded the CIB for
being under enemy fire on three separate occasions while performing duties
of a radio operator and body guard for the sector advisor.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on 24 March 1967.  The application submitted in this case is dated
29 October 2003.

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.  He enlisted in Beckley, West Virginia, on 24 August 1960 for a period
of 3 years and training as a clerk typist.  He successfully completed all
of his training at Fort Knox, Kentucky, and was transferred to Puerto Rico
on 18 January 1961.

4.  He was promoted to the pay grade of E-5 on 29 August 1963 and on
7 October 1963, he completed a statement of personal history (DD Form 398)
indicating that he had a scar over his left eye and on his left cheek.

5.  He was honorably discharged on 23 August 1963 and reenlisted on 24
August 1963 for a period of 3 years.  He remained in Puerto Rico until 23
December 1964, when he was transferred to Washington, D.C. for duty as an
administrative specialist.

6.  On 30 March 1966, he was transferred to Vietnam and was assigned as an
administrative specialist for Advisory Team #2, I Corps Advisory Group,
USMACV.  He was promoted to the pay grade of E-6 on 25 August 1966.

7.  He completed his tour in Vietnam on 23 March 1967 and was transferred
to Oakland Army Base, California, where he was honorably discharged on
24 March 1967 as an overseas returnee.  He had served 6 years, 7 months and
1 days of total active service and was awarded the National Defense Service
Medal, the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal, the Good Conduct Medal, the
Vietnam Service Medal (VSM) and the Bronze Star Medal.

8.  A review of the applicant's records fails to show that the senior
advisor's request to award the CIB to the applicant was ever formally acted
upon.  There are no orders awarding him the CIB nor is there any indication
that he was ever wounded as a result of enemy action or that he was treated
for any such wounds/injuries.  His name is also not contained on the
Vietnam Casualty Listing.

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part,
that the Purple Heart (PH) is awarded for a wound sustained as a result of
hostile action.  Substantiating evidence must be provided to verify that:
(1) the wound was the result of hostile action; (2) the wound required
medical treatment; and (3) the medical treatment was made a matter of
official record.

10.  U.S. Army Vietnam (USARV) Regulation 672-1 (Decorations and Awards)
provided for award of the Purple Heart (PH).  It stated that soldiers who
were treated and returned to their units within 24 hours of being wounded
would be awarded the Purple Heart by their unit of assignment.  For wounded
soldiers requiring hospitalization in excess of 24 hours or medical
evacuation from Vietnam, the authority to award the Purple Heart was
delegated to hospital commanders.

11.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent
part, that the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB) is awarded to infantry
officers and to enlisted and warrant officer personnel who have an infantry
military occupational specialty (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 Total Army Personnel
Command 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.

12.  U.S. Army Vietnam Regulation Number 672-1 (Awards and Decorations)
provided, in pertinent part, for award of the Combat Infantryman Badge
(CIB).  Appendix 3 to Annex A of this regulation listed advisor positions
in Military Assistance Command, Vietnam (MACV) which were considered
infantry positions and for which award of the CIB was authorized.  Among
these positions, “Senior Advisor, Mobile Advisory Team (includes assistant
or deputy)” was listed.  It also listed positions that were not authorized
award of the CIB, which included that of a radio/telephone operator (if
primary duty is not that of accompanying infantry or infantry-type units on
tactical operations).

13.  AR 600-8-22, in pertinent part, authorizes award of a bronze service
star, based on qualifying service, for each campaign listed in Appendix B
of this regulation and states that authorized bronze service stars will be
worn on the appropriate service medal.  The applicant served in Vietnam
during two campaigns -- Vietnam Counteroffensive, which extended from 25
December 1965 through 30 June 1966; Vietnam Counteroffensive, Phase II,
which extended from 1 July 1966 through 31 May 1967.  Accordingly, the
applicant is authorized to wear two bronze service stars on his already
awarded VSM.

14.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign
Participation Credit Register) lists the unit awards received by units
serving in Vietnam.  This document show the unit to which the applicant was
assigned was awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm
(RVNGC w/Palm) Unit Citation for the period 8 February 1962 to 28 March
1973 by Department of the Army General Orders 8, dated 1974.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Although the applicant may have served in the capacity of a radio
operator and body guard with infantry units on the three dates listed by
the senior advisor in his recommendation for award of the CIB to the
applicant, the applicant was assigned to an administrative specialist
position, possessed the military occupational specialty of an
administrative specialist and did not qualify for award of the CIB under
any regulatory guidance in effect at the time.  Accordingly, there is no
basis to award him the CIB.

2.  Additionally, the applicant has not submitted and the available records
do not contain any evidence to show that he was wounded as a result of
enemy action, that he was treated for any such wounds and that the
treatment was made a matter of record.  Therefore, absent evidence to the
contrary, there appears to be no basis to award him the Purple Heart.

3.  However, the evidence of record does establish that the applicant is
entitled to be awarded the RVNGC w/Palm Unit Citation and two bronze
service stars for wear on his already awarded VSM.

4.  Evidence shows that the applicant’s records contain administrative
error which does not require action by the Board.  Therefore,
administrative correction of the applicant's records will be accomplished
by the Case Management Support Division (CMSD), St. Louis, Missouri, as
outlined by the Board in paragraph 3 of the BOARD
DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION section below.

5.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 24 March 1967; therefore, the time for
the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or injustice
expired on 23 March 1970.  However, the applicant did not 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

__mdm___  __kah___  __rld___  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.

3.  The Board determined that administrative error in the records of the
individual should be corrected.  Therefore, the Board requests that the
CMSD-St. Louis administratively correct the records of the individual
concerned by awarding him the RVNGC w/Palm Unit Citation and two bronze
service stars for wear on his already awarded VSM.


                                  Mark D. Manning
            ______________________
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2004100199                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20040914                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |(DENY)                                  |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES                  |61/PH                                   |
|1.107.0015              |                                        |
|2.107.0111              |157/CIB                                 |
|3.107.0094              |140/RVNGC                               |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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