RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:            03 October 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:   AR20060004192


      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. Kenneth Wright                |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Thomas Ray                    |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Sherry Stone                  |     |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 his report of separation (DD
Form 214) be corrected to reflect his award of the Combat Infantryman Badge
(CIB).

2.  The applicant states that he was awarded the CIB and it was omitted
from his DD Form 214 at the time of separation.  He further states that he
now suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and having the CIB
on his DD Form 214 is the only way he can get the help he needs.

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

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on 1 December 1970.  The application submitted in this case is
dated 7 March 2006.

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 in Syracuse, New York on 15 January 1969.
He was transferred to Fort Dix, New Jersey to undergo his training and he
successfully completed his basic combat training.  He remained at Fort Dix
to undergo his advanced individual training (AIT) and he underwent two
different courses of training and failed to complete either one.  He was
then awarded the military occupational specialty (MOS) of a duty soldier,
MOS 57A10.

4.  On 12 January 1970, he was transferred to Vietnam, where he was
assigned to a Signal Group and was further attached to the 272nd Military
Police Company in Nha Trang for duty as a military policeman.  He was
advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 12 April 1970.

5.  He departed Vietnam on 1 December 1970 and was transferred to Fort
Lewis, Washington, where he was honorably released from active duty
(REFRAD) as an overseas returnee.  He had served 1 year, 10 months and 17
days of total active service and his DD Form 214 shows that he was awarded
the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM), the
Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal and his marksmanship badges.

6.  His records fail to show any evidence to suggest that he was ever
awarded the CIB.  However, his records do show that he had excellent
conduct and efficiency ratings throughout his service and his records are
void of any derogatory information that would serve to disqualify him from
award of the Good Conduct Medal (GCMDL).

7.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part,
that the Combat Infantryman Badge is awarded to infantry officers and to
enlisted and warrant officer persons 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 U.S. Army Human
Resources Command (formerly known as the Total Army Personnel Command) has
advised, in similar cases, that during the Vietnam era the Combat
Infantryman Badge was awarded only to enlisted individuals who held and
served in MOS 11B, 11C, 11F, 11G, or 11H.

8.  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 except that a service school efficiency
rating based upon academic proficiency of at least "good" rendered
subsequent to 11 November 1956 was not disqualifying.  However, there was
no right or entitlement to the medal until the immediate commander made a
positive recommendation for its award and until the awarding authority
announced the award in General Orders.

9.  Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit
Register-Vietnam Era) was published to assist commanders and personnel
officers in determining or establishing the eligibility of individual
members for campaign participation credit, assault landing credit, and unit
citation badges awarded during the Vietnam Conflict.  Table 1 (Army Units
in Numerical Order) of the pamphlet indicates that the applicant’s unit was
subsequently awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm
(RVNGC w/Palm) Unit Citation. Additionally, he participated in three
campaigns and thus is authorized to wear three bronze service stars on his
already awarded VSM.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contention that he was awarded the CIB has been noted;
however, he has failed to show through the evidence submitted and the
evidence of record that such was the case.  The evidence of record shows
that he did not possess an infantry MOS nor was he assigned to an infantry
unit that was engaged in combat with the enemy.  Therefore, in the absence
of evidence to the contrary, there is no basis to add the award of the CIB
to his DD Form 214.

2.  However, after carefully examining the applicant’s record of service,
the Board has determined that the applicant should have received the GCMDL
for his service from 15 January 1969 through 1 December 1970.  This
conclusion is based on the fact that the record is void of any derogatory
information, which would preclude the applicant from being awarded the
GCMDL, and the lack of any specific action by the applicant’s unit
commander to disqualify him from receiving the award.

3.  Additionally, the applicant’s unit was subsequently awarded the RVNGC
w/Palm Unit Citation and he participated in three campaigns.  Accordingly,
he is entitled to be awarded the RVNGC w/Palm Unit Citation and three
bronze service stars for wear on his already awarded VSM at this time as
well.

4.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 1 December 1970; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on 30 November 1973.  The applicant did not file within
the 3-year statute of limitations; however, based on the available
(evidence or argument), it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
failure to timely file in this case.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

___KW__  ___TR __  ___SS __  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 GCMDL
for the period of 15 January 1969 through 1 December 1970, the RVNGC w/Palm
Unit Citation and three bronze service stars for wear on his VSM.

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
adding the CIB to his records.




                            _____ Kenneth Wright_____
                                      CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060004192                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20061003                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD)                                    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |19701201                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200, Ch 5. Sec VII               |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |REFRAD                                  |
|BOARD DECISION          |(PARTIAL GRANT )                        |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |AR 15-185                               |
|ISSUES                  |157/CIB                                 |
|1.107.0111              |                                        |
|2.107.0056              |102/GCMDL                               |
|3.107.0094              |140/RVNGC                               |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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