RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:         27 October 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050002238


      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. Yvonne Foskey                 |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Melvin H. Meyer               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Allen L. Raub                 |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Linda D. Simmons              |     |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, correction of the following items of
his 15 January 1969 separation document (DD Form 214):  Item 3 (Social
Security Number); Item 17c (Date of Entry); Item 23a (Specialty Number &
Title); and
Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign
Ribbons Awarded or Authorized).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that last digit of the SSN entered in
Item 3 of his DD Form 214 is incorrect.  He also claims that Item 23a of
his DD Form 214 should be corrected to show his military occupational
specialty (MOS) was 11B10 and that he was a replacement on the rifle squad.
 He finally states that the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB) should be added
to the list of awards entered in Item 24 of his DD Form 214.

3.  The applicant provides the following documents in support of his
application:  Social Security Card and DD Form 214.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
that occurred on 15 January 1969.  The application submitted in this case
is dated
2 February 2005.

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.  The applicant’s record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) and
entered active duty on 17 April 1967, as evidence by the enlistment
contract
(DD Form 4) on file.

4.  Item 1 (Name and Service Number) of the Enlisted Qualification Record
(DA Form 20) prepared upon the applicant’s entry on active duty, contains a
SSN with the number 5 as the last digit.  Item 22 (Military Occupational
Specialties) confirms he was trained in and awarded military occupational
specialty (MOS) 11B20 (Light Weapons Infantryman).
5.  Item 38 of the applicant’s DA Form 20 shows he served in Republic of
Vietnam (RVN) from 17 September 1967 through 22 April 1968, and that he was
assigned to Company A, 1st Battalion, 7th Cavalry Regiment, 1st Cavalry
Division, performing duties in MOS 11B as a Rifleman.  It further shows he
received "Excellent" conduct and efficiency ratings at each of his active
duty assignments.

6.  Item 40 (Wounds) of the applicant’s DA Form 20 contains an entry
showing he was wounded in action in the RVN on 9 November 1967.  Item 41
(Awards and Decorations) shows he earned the following awards during his
tenure on active duty:  National Defense Service Medal (NDSM), Vietnam
Service Medal (VSM), RVN Campaign Medal, Purple Heart (PH), and Expert
Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar.

7.  The applicant’s Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) contains no
derogatory information and there is no documented record of a
disqualification
from any of the applicant's active duty commanders that would have
precluded
him from receiving the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM).

8.  The applicant’s MPRJ also contains Headquarters, 1st Cavalry Division
(Airmobile) General Orders Number 7199, dated 2 December 1967, which
awarded the applicant the PH for wounds he received in connection with
military operations against a hostile force on 9 November 1967; and
Headquarters,
67th Evacuation Hospital General Orders Number 291, dated 13 November 1967,
which awarded him the PH for wounds he received in connection with military
operations against a hostile force on 11 November 1967.

9.  On 15 January 1969, the applicant was honorably released from active
duty after completing 1 year, 8 months, and 29 days of active military
service.  The DD Form 214 he was issued at the time lists the number 4 in
the last digit of the SSN entered in Item 3.  Item 17c contains no entry,
and Item 23a shows his MOS was 11B20 (Light Weapons Infantryman).  Item 24
shows he earned the following awards during his tenure on active duty:  PH;
RVN Campaign Medal; VSM; NDSM; Sharpshooter Qualification Badge with Rifle
(M-14) Bar; and Marksmanship Qualification with Rifle (M-16) Bar.

10.  The applicant provides a copy of his Social Security Card, which shows
the last digit of his SSN is 5.

11.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy and
criteria concerning individual military awards.  Paragraph 2-8 contains the
regulatory guidance pertaining to award of the PH.  It states, in pertinent
part, that in order to award a PH there must be evidence that the wound for
which the award is being made was received as a result of enemy action, the
wound must have required medical treatment and the medical treatment must
have been made a matter of official record.  The regulation stipulates that
an Oak Leaf Cluster is issued to denote the second and subsequent awards of
the PH.

12.  Paragraph 2-13 of the awards regulation contains guidance on the VSM.
It states, in pertinent part, that a bronze service star is authorized with
this award for each campaign a member is credited with participating in
while serving in the RVN.

13.  Chapter 4 of the awards regulation contains guidance on the AGCM.  It
states, in pertinent part, that it is awarded to individuals who
distinguish themselves by their exemplary conduct, efficiency and fidelity
during a qualifying period of active duty enlisted service.  After 27 June
1950 to the present time, the current standard for award of the Good
Conduct Medal is 3 years of qualifying service, but as little as one year
is required for the first award in those cases when the period of service
ends with the termination of Federal military service.  Although there is
no automatic entitlement to the Good Conduct Medal, disqualification must
be justified.

14.  Chapter 8 of the awards regulation 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 a case, 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.

15.  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 shows that during his tenure of
assignment, the applicant’s unit (Company A, 1st Battalion, 7th Cavalry,
1st Cavalry Division) received the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with
Palm Unit Citation and Valorous Unit Award.  It also shows that during the
period of his assignment, campaign credit was given for the Vietnam
Counteroffensive Phase III, TET Counteroffensive, and Vietnam
Counteroffensive Phase IV campaigns.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant enlisted in the RA and
entered active duty on 17 April 1967, as evidenced by the DD Form 4 on
file.  Thus, it would be appropriate to correct Item 17c of his DD Form 214
by adding the entry “17  04  67”.

2.  The record also shows that the last digit of the applicant’s SSN is 5
and not 4, as is currently listed in Item 3 of his DD Form 214.  This is
evidenced by the entry in Item 1 of his DA Form 20, and in the orders and
documents on file in his MPRJ.  As a result, it would appropriate to amend
Item 3 of his DD Form 214 by replacing the last digit of the SSN entry,
which is currently the number 4, with the correct number of “5”.

3.  By regulation, second and subsequent awards of the PH are recognized
with award of an Oak Leaf Cluster.  The evidence of record confirms the
applicant was awarded the PH twice, for being wounded in action in the RVN
on 9 and
11 November 1967, respectively.  Therefore, his record should be corrected
to show he was awarded the PH with 1st Oak Leaf Cluster, which denotes two
separate awards of the PH.

4.  The evidence of record further confirms the applicant held and served
in an infantry MOS, and was assigned to an infantry unit while serving in
the RVN.  It also confirms he was wounded in action and awarded the PH
twice, which confirms his presence and personal participation with his unit
in combat operations.  Therefore, he satisfies the regulatory criteria
necessary to support award of the CIB, and it would be appropriate to award
him the CIB and add it to his record at this time.

5.  The applicant's record also confirms he received "Excellent" conduct
and
efficiency ratings at all of his active duty assignments.  Further, the
record is void
of any derogatory information or a specific disqualification by any of the
active
duty unit commanders for whom he served that would disqualify him from
receiving the AGCM.  Therefore, it would be appropriate to award him the
first award of the AGCM, for his qualifying period of honorable active duty
service from 17 April 1967 through 15 January 1969.

6.  The record also confirms that based on his service and campaign
participation in the RVN, the applicant is entitled to the RVN Gallantry
Cross with Palm Unit Citation, Valorous Unit Award and 3 bronze service
stars with his VSM.  Thus, it would also be appropriate to add these awards
to his record and separation document at this time.

7.  The applicant's contention that Item 23 (Specialty Number & Title) of
his
DD Form 214 should read 11B –Rifle Squad was also carefully considered.
However, the record confirms he was trained in and awarded MOS 11B20
(Light Weapons Infantryman), and this is correctly entered in Item 23a of
his
DD Form 214.  The fact he served as a rifleman does not impact this entry.


BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

___MHM_  __ALR__  ___LDS _  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to
warrant a recommendation for partial 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 by awarding him the Combat
Infantryman Badge and Army Good Conduct Medal; by amending Item 3 of his 15
January 1969
DD Form 214 by replacing the number 4 in the last digit with the correct
number “5” and Item 17c (Date of Entry) by adding the entry “17  04  67”;
by showing he was awarded the Purple Heart with 1st Oak Leaf Cluster; by
showing he is entitled to the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm
Unit Citation, Valorous Unit Award, and 3 bronze service stars with his
Vietnam Service Medal; and by providing him a correction to his separation
document that includes these changes.

2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is
insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result,
the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to
correction of Item 23 (Specialty Number & Title) of his DD Form 214.





                            _____Melvin H. Meyer_____
                                      CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050002238                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005/10/27                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD,                                     |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1969/01/15                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR635-200. . .                          |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |Retired                                 |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT PLUS                              |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Schneider                           |
|ISSUES         1.       |                                        |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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