RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        1 November 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050003460


      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. Prevolia A. Harper            |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. James E. Anderholm            |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Thomas E. O’Shaughnessy Jr.   |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Carol A. Kornhoff             |     |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 correction of his records to show award of the
Bronze Star Medal and the Combat Infantryman Badge.

2.  The applicant states that his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United
States Report of Transfer or Discharge) does not show that he was awarded
the Bronze Star Medal.  He further states that he should be entitled to the
Combat Infantryman Badge.

3.  The applicant provides a self-authored letter, General Orders Number
1477, and 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 which
occurred on 11 June 1971.  The application submitted in this case is
undated.

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 Army on 13 January
1969.
He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 13A10
(Cannoneer) and the highest rank he attained while serving on active duty
was specialist four (SP4).

4.  The applicant’s Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows that
he served in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) from 13 November 1969 to
25 October 1970.  Item 38 (Record of Assignments) shows that during his RVN
tour, on
30 November 1969, he was assigned to Company D, 2nd Battalion, 40th
Artillery Regiment, 199th Infantry Brigade.  During the period 1 May 1970
to 1 August 1970, the applicant was assigned to D Battery, 2nd Battalion,
40th Artillery, 199th Infantry Brigade.  His MOS for this period is shown
as RTO (Radio/Telephone Operator).  He then served with the 1st Battalion
(Airmobile), 321st Artillery, 101st Airborne Division as an ammunition
handler for the remainder of his tour.


5.  On 11 June 1971, the applicant was honorably discharged after
completing
1 year, 11 months and 29 days of active military service.  The separation
document (DD Form 214) he was issued at the time shows he held the MOS
13A10 and shows his branch was field artillery basic.  However, Special
Orders Number 161, Headquarters, U.S. Army Personnel Center, Fort Lewis,
Washington, dated 10 June 1971, shows the applicant’s MOS as 11B21
(Infantryman).  The applicant also provided a copy of these orders.

6.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 he was issued shows he earned the following
awards during his active duty tenure:  National Defense Service Medal,
Vietnam Service Medal,  Vietnam Campaign Medal, 2 Overseas Service Bars,
Expert Marksmanship Badge (M-16), and the Marksmanship Badge (M-14).

7.  The applicant provides General Orders Number 14177, Headquarters, 101st
Airborne Division (Airmobile), dated 5 December 1970.  The heading on these
orders show Award of the Army Commendation Medal, however, this document
also shows the applicant was awarded the Bronze Star Medal.  It appears
that an error was made on the orders announcing the title of this award.
These orders further show the Bronze Star Medal was awarded for meritorious
service during the period 1 November 1969 to 31 August 1970.  The
applicant’s MOS is shown as 13A10.

8.  The applicant’s record contains a memorandum from the commanding
officer for the 2nd Battalion, 40th Artillery, to the 199th Infantry
Brigade commanding general.  This memorandum shows the applicant’s name on
a list of Soldiers who participated in the United States Armed Forces
Campaign in Cambodia during the period 6 May 1970 to 29 June 1970.  The
applicant’s DA Form 20 shows he was serving as the RTO for the unit during
this time.

9.  The applicant provided a self-authored letter in which he stated, in
part, that he was awarded the Bronze Star Medal and would like for this
award to be shown on his DD Form 214.  He also stated that he has a problem
with not being able to receive the Combat Infantryman Badge.  He further
stated that upon his arrival in Vietnam his MOS was 13A10; however, three
weeks later he was assigned to an infantry unit as an RTO (Radio Telephone
Operator).

10.  The applicant further stated that his MOS did not stop him from being
assigned to an infantry unit where he stood and fought with the other men
in his company.  He explained that the chances of him getting shot,
wounded, or killed were not any less because of his MOS.  He further
explained that his chances were greater because if the radio was destroyed
then calls could not be made for artillery or air support.

11.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy and
criteria concerning individual military awards.  Paragraph 2-13 contains
guidance on award of the VSM.  It states, in pertinent part, that a bronze
service star is authorized with this award for each RVN campaign a member
is credited with participating in while serving in the RVN.

12.  Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit
Register) establishes the eligibility of individual members for campaign
participation credit, assault landing credit, and unit citation badges
awarded during the Vietnam Conflict.  It confirms that during his tenure of
assignment with
D Battery, 2nd Battalion, 40th Artillery, the unit received the Valorous
Unit Award, the RVN Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class, and the RVN
Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation.  It further shows that during his
RVN tour, he was credited with participating in the Winter-Spring Campaign,
the Sanctuary Counteroffensive, and the Counteroffensive Phase VII
campaigns.

13.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) 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.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s claim of entitlement to the CIB and the supporting
third-party statement he provided were carefully considered.  However, by
regulation, in order to qualify for the CIB, in addition to serving in
combat with a qualifying unit, an enlisted soldier must have held an
infantry MOS, which according to Army HRC awards officials included MOS
11B, 11C, 11F, 11G AND 11H.  The MOS 13A10 was not considered an infantry
MOS for CIB purposes during the Vietnam era.

2.  The evidence of record shows the applicant held and served in MOS
13A10, and performed various duties as a field artilleryman including
cannoneer and ammunition handler while serving in the RVN.  He also served
several months as an RTO.  As a result, he did not serve in a qualifying
infantry MOS.  Although his RVN combat service was meritorious, his request
for the CIB must be denied in the interest of all those who served in the
RVN and who faced similar circumstances.


3.  The applicant provided General Orders Number 14177, dated 5 December
1970.  This award shows the Army Commendation Medal in the heading.
However, since the award contains the appropriate authority for the Bronze
Star Medal (Executive Order 11046), it is concluded that it was the intent
of his former command to award this medal.  Therefore, applicant’s records
should be corrected to show this award.

4.  The record further shows that based on his RVN service and campaign
participation, the applicant is entitled to the Valorous Unit Award, the
RVN Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class, and the Gallantry Cross with
Palm Unit Citation The applicant is also entitled to three bronze service
stars with his VSM.  Therefore, it would also be appropriate to add these
awards to his record and separation document.

5.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 11 June 1971.  Therefore, the time for
him to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired on
10 June 1974.
Although the applicant did not file within the 3-year statute of
limitations, it would be appropriate to excuse failure to timely file in
this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

__JAE __  __TEO __  __CAK__  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 Bronze
Star Medal, the Valorous Unit Award, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry
Cross with Palm Unit Citation, the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor
Medal First Class, and three bronze service stars to be worn on his Vietnam
Service Medal.



2.  The Board further determined that 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 the Combat
Infantryman Badge.









                            ___ James E. Anderholm____
                                      CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050003460                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20051101                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)          |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |                                        |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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