RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        1 August 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050018244


      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             |
|     |Mrs. Nancy L. Amos                |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Kathleen A. Newman            |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Conrad V. Meyer               |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Yolanda Maldonado             |     |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 Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was in combat while in
Vietnam.

3.  The applicant provides his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United
States Report of Transfer or Discharge).

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
which occurred on 8 January 1971.  The application submitted in this case
was received on 23 December 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 was inducted into the Army on 9 January 1969.  He
completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was
awarded military occupational specialty 11C (Infantry Indirect Fire
Crewman).

4.  The applicant arrived in Vietnam and was assigned to Company E, 1st
Battalion, 35th Infantry, 4th Infantry Division on 18 January 1969.  His DA
Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows he performed duties as an
11B10 Scout Observer.

5.  On 13 July 1969, while at Landing Zone Ruth, the applicant accepted
nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice
for violating battalion standing operating procedures by putting a round in
the chamber of his weapon and discharging it.

6.  The applicant was reassigned to Company E, 1st Battalion, 22d Infantry,
4th Infantry Division on 19 March 1970.  His DA Form 20 shows he performed
duties as an 11B10 Senior Scout Observer.  He departed Vietnam on 31 May
1970 after being credited with participation in four campaigns.

7.  The applicant was honorably released from active duty on 8 January 1971
after completing 2 years of creditable active service.  Aside from the one
Article 15, there is no other evidence of adverse actions taken against the
applicant.  His conduct and efficiency were rated as “excellent” throughout
his service.

8.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows he was awarded the National Defense
Service Medal, the Army Commendation with [first] oak leaf cluster, the
Vietnam Service Medal with two bronze service stars, the Air Medal, the
Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with device 1960, and the Republic of
Vietnam Cross of Gallantry with Palm Unit Citation.

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides for award of the
CIB to a Soldier who is an infantryman satisfactorily performing infantry
duties, who is assigned to an infantry unit during such time as the unit is
engaged in active ground combat, and must actively participate in such
ground combat.

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-2 provides for the award of the Air Medal to any
person who will have distinguished himself while participating in aerial
flight.  It may be awarded to personnel whose combat duties require them to
fly in the attack elements of units involved in air-land assaults against
an armed enemy.  At the time, U.S. Army Vietnam Regulation 672-1 provided
that individuals who traveled by aircraft from point to point for the
purpose of participating in combat assaults were eligible for the award of
the Air Medal for achievement after completion of 25 assault missions.

11.  U. S. Army Vietnam Regulation 672-1 divided combat missions into three
categories.  A category I mission was defined as a mission performed in an
assault role in which a hostile force was engaged and was characterized by
delivery of ordnance against the hostile force, or delivery of friendly
troops or supplies into the immediate combat operations area.  A category
II mission was characterized by support rendered a friendly force
immediately before, during, or immediately following a combat operation.  A
category III mission was characterized by support of friendly forces not
connected with an immediate combat operation but which must have been
accomplished at altitudes which made the aircraft at times vulnerable to
small arms fire, or under hazardous weather or terrain conditions.  To be
recommended for award of the Air Medal, an individual must have completed a
minimum of 25 category I missions, 50 category II missions or 100 category
III missions.  Since various types of missions would have been completed in
accumulating flight time toward award of an Air Medal for sustained
operations, different computations would have had to be made to combine
category I, II and III flight time and adjust it to a common denominator.

12.   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, at the time of the
applicant's assignment to the 1st Battalion, 35th Infantry, it was cited
for award of the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class
Unit Citation for the period 1 August 1969 through 31 October 1969 by
Department of the Army General Orders Number  53 dated 1970.

13.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 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.

14.  Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time, provided policy and
criteria concerning individual military decorations.  It stated that the
Army Good Conduct Medal was awarded for each 3 years of continuous enlisted
active Federal military service completed on or after 27 August 1940 and,
for the first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June
1950 of less than 3 years but more than 1 year.  At the time, a Soldier’s
conduct and efficiency ratings must have been rated as “excellent” for the
entire period of qualifying service.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  It is acknowledged that the applicant served in Vietnam with an
infantry battalion and in an infantry position.  However, he performed
duties as a scout observer.  There is no evidence to show he participated
in ground combat.  Although he was awarded the Air Medal (in addition to
other personal decorations), it cannot be determined if he was awarded the
Air Medal for participating in combat assaults (category I missions) or
because he participated in category III missions (support of friendly
forces not connected with an immediate combat operation but which must have
been accomplished at altitudes which made the aircraft at times vulnerable
to small arms fire, or under hazardous weather or terrain conditions).

2.  Regrettably, there is insufficient evidence to show the applicant met
the eligibility criteria for award of the Combat Infantryman Badge.

3.  Although the applicant received one Article 15 during his service, that
Article 15 did not prevent his commander at the time and all his other
commanders from rating his conduct and efficiency as “excellent.”
Therefore, it appears he met the eligibility criteria for award of the Army
Good Conduct Medal for the period          9 January 1969 through 8 January
1971.

4.  The applicant was assigned to a unit during a period of time that unit
was awarded the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class
Unit Citation.  Therefore, this unit award should be added to his DD Form
214.

5.  The applicant received credit for participating in four campaigns while
in Vietnam.  His DD Form 214 should be amended to show he is authorized the
Vietnam Service Medal with four bronze service stars.

6.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 8 January 1971; therefore, the time
for     the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on     7 January 1974.  The applicant did not file within
the 3-year statute of limitations; however, based on the available evidence
it would be in the interest of justice to excuse failure to timely file in
this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

__kan___  __cvm___  __ym____  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:

      a.  awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 9 January
1969 through 8 January 1971; and



      b.  amending his DD Form 214 to add the Army Good Conduct Medal and
the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit
Citation, and to show he is authorized the Vietnam Service Medal with four
bronze service stars.


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
award of the Combat Infantryman Badge.



                            __Kathleen A. Newman__
                                      CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050018244                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060801                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT                                   |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Schneider                           |
|ISSUES         1.       |107.0111                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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