RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        16 August 2007
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070003438


      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.

|     |Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano          |     |Director             |
|     |Mr. Joseph A. Adriance            |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. William D. Powers             |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. William Blakely               |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Donald L. Lewy                |     |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, award of the Combat Infantryman
Badge (CIB).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he participated in active ground
combat in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) from 11 through 26 November 1966,
while assigned to Company A, 2nd Battalion, 22nd Infantry Regiment, in
Operation Attleboro-Phase II, as well as other operations, which his
military records should show.

3.  The applicant provides his separation document (DD Form 214) and a
National Personnel Records Center (NPRC) Letter, dated 1 February 2007, in
support of his application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  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 also allows the
Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an
applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations
if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.
While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided
in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a
substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is
granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the
applicant’s failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are
insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant's record shows he was inducted into the Army and entered
active duty on 6 December 1965.  He was trained in and awarded military
occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman), and the
highest rank he attained while serving on active duty was specialist four
(SP4).

3.  The applicant's Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows he
served in the RVN from 22 September 1966 through 19 September 1967.  Item
38 (Record of Assignments) shows the during his RVN tour, he was assigned
to Company A, 2nd Battalion, 22nd Infantry Regiment, performing duties in
MOS 11B as a grenadier, light weapons infantryman and rifleman.  Item 38
also shows that he received no less than "Excellent" conduct and efficiency
ratings at all of his active duty assignments.

4.  Item 41 (Awards and Decorations) of the applicant's DA Form 20 shows
that he earned the following awards:  National Defense Service Medal
(NDSM); Vietnam Service Medal (VSM); RVN Campaign Medal; Army Commendation
Medal (ARCOM); Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle (M-16)
Bar; and Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle (M-14)
Bar.

5.  The applicant's Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) is void of any
derogatory information or a unit commander disqualification that would have
precluded the applicant from receiving the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM).


6.  On 19 September 1967, the applicant was honorably separated after
completing a total of 1 year, 9 months and 14 days of active military
service.  The DD Form 214 he was issued shows, in Item 24 (Decorations,
Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or
Authorized), that he earned the following awards during his active duty
tenure:  NDSM, ARCOM,  VSM, and RVN Campaign Medal.

7.  A review of the unit history of the 2nd Battalion, 22nd Infantry
Regiment, shows that during the Vietnam War, the unit was initially
assigned to the
4th Infantry Division until August 1967, when it was transferred to the
25th Infantry Division.   The Battalion took part in "Operation Attleboro"
and went on to take part in one of the most fiercely contested engagements
of the Vietnam conflict.  The Battalion received the Presidential Unit
Citation (PUC) for the Battle Of Soui Tre on 21 March 1967, one of the
largest single day engagements of the war.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy and
criteria concerning individual military awards.  Paragraph 2-13 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.

9.  Chapter 4 of the awards regulation prescribes the policy for award of
the
AGCM.  It states, in pertinent part, that the AGCM is awarded to
individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency and
fidelity during a qualifying period of active duty enlisted service.  This
period is 3 years, except in those cases when the period for the first
award ends with the termination of a period of Federal military service, in
which case a period of more than 1 year is a qualifying period.  Although
there is no automatic entitlement to the AGCM, disqualification must be
justified.

10.  Paragraph 8-6 of the awards regulation provides the policy and
procedure for award of the CIB.  It states, in pertinent part, that there
are basically three requirements for award of the CIB.  The Soldier must be
an infantryman satisfactorily performing infantry duties, he must be
assigned to an infantry unit during such time as the unit is engaged in
active ground combat, and he must actively participate in such ground
combat.  Specific requirements state, in effect, that an Army enlisted
Soldier must have an infantry specialty, satisfactorily performed duty
while assigned or attached as a member of an infantry unit of brigade,
regimental, or smaller size during any period such unit was engaged in
active ground combat.  A recipient must be personally present and under
hostile fire while serving in an assigned infantry primary duty, in a unit
actively engaged in ground combat with the enemy.

11.  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  in the RVN, the applicant’s unit (2nd Battalion, 22nd Infantry
Regiment) received the PUC, RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation and
RVN Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation.  It also shows
that during the applicant's period of assignment, participation credit was
granted for the Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase II and Vietnam
Counteroffensive Phase III campaigns.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that he is entitled to the CIB based on his
active participation in ground combat in the RVN was carefully considered
and found to have merit.  By regulation, in order to support award of the
CIB there must be evidence that the member held and served in an infantry
MOS, that he served in a qualifying infantry unit of brigade, regimental or
smaller size and that he was personally present and under hostile fire
while serving in an assigned infantry primary duty, in a qualifying
infantry unit actively engaged in ground combat with the enemy.

2.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant held and served in an
infantry MOS (serving as a grenadier, light weapons infantryman and
rifleman) during his tenure of assignment in the RVN.  It also shows that
during this period, he was assigned to Company A, 2nd Battalion, 22nd
Infantry Regiment, which was a qualifying infantry unit.  The unit history
of the applicant's unit confirms that during his tenure of assignment, the
unit participated in Operation Attleboro and the battle of Soui Tre, for
which it received the PUC.
3.  Absent any evidence of record showing the applicant was assigned to a
Headquarters element during the period of his RVN assignment, it is logical
to presume that he was present with and actively participated with his unit
while it was engaged in ground operations against enemy forces during
Operation Attleboro and the Battle of Soui Tre.  Therefore, it would be
appropriate and serve the interest of justice to award him the CIB at this
time.

4.  The applicant's record confirms that 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 unit commander disqualification
that would have precluded him from receiving the AGCM.  As a result, it
would be appropriate to award the applicant the first award of the AGCM,
for his qualifying period of honorable active duty service from service
from 6 December 1965 through 19 September 1967.

5.  The applicant's record also shows that based on his service and
campaign participation in the RVN, he is entitled to the PUC, RVN Gallantry
Cross with Palm Unit Citation, RVN Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class
Unit Citation and
2 bronze service stars with his VSM.  His record also shows he earned the
Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle (M-16) Bar and
Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle (M-14) Bar, which
were not included in the list of awards contained on his separation
document.  Therefore, it would also be appropriate to add these awards and
decorations to his record and DD Form 214 at this time.

BOARD VOTE:

___WB__  __WDP__  __DLL__  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant
a recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all
Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by:

      a.  awarding him the Combat Infantryman Badge, for his exemplary
conduct in ground combat while serving in the Republic of Vietnam and
Army Good Conduct Medal, for his qualifying period of honorable active duty
service from 6 December 1965 through 19 September 1967;

      b.  amending Item 24 of his 19 September 1967 DD Form 214 by deleting
the current list of awards and replacing it with the entry "National
Defense Service Medal, Army Commendation Medal, Army Good Conduct Medal,
Vietnam Service Medal with 2 bronze service stars, Republic of Vietnam
Campaign Medal with 1960 Device, Presidential Unit Citation, Republic of
Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, Republic of Vietnam Civil
Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation, Combat Infantryman Badge,
Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle (M-16) Bar and
Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle (M-14) Bar"; and

      c.  providing him a correction to his separation document that
includes these changes.




                            _____William D. Powers___
                                      CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20070003438                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2007/08/16                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1967/09/19                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |Trns to Reserve                         |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT PLUS                              |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Ms. Mitrano                             |
|ISSUES         1.  46   |107.0000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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