RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  11 September 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070004244 


	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. Dean L. Turnbull

Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:


Mr. Larry C. Bergquist

Chairperson

Ms. Marla J. N. Troup

Member

Ms. Ernestine I. Fields

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 that his records be corrected to show the award of the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB). 

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he served in combat for five months as a Radio Telephone Operator (RTO) in Vietnam.  He states that he had volunteered to serve as an RTO with 1st Battalion, 7th Cavalry while in Vietnam.  He engaged the enemy several times with intense fire as they called for artillery support.

3.  The applicant does not provide any additional documentation. 

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 military records show that he entered active duty on  
3 November 1967.  He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was awarded the military occupational specialty (MOS)  
13A1O (Cannoneer).  He was honorably released from active duty on 31 October 1969 after serving 1 year, 11 months, and 28 days of active service.

3.  He served a tour as a 13B4O (Field Artillery Crewman) with Battery C,  
2nd Battalion, 19th Artillery, 1st Cavalry (Airmobile) in the Republic of Vietnam during the period 12 April 1968 to 2 April 1969.

4.  Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant's DD Form 
214 shows the National Defense Service Medal, Vietnam Service Medal with bronze service star, Vietnam Campaign Medal with 60 Device, Overseas Service Bar (2), Bronze Star Medal, and the Air Medal.  However, it does not show the award of the CIB.

5.  The applicant's military records show that he never held the primary MOS as an 11B4O (Infantryman).

6.  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 officers 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 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.

7.  United States Army Vietnam Regulation Number 672-1, Combat Infantryman Badge Guidance, states, in effect, that radio/telephone operators with the awarded MOS are only entitled to the CIB if their primary duty was to accompany infantry or infantry-type units on tactical operations.

8.  A review of the applicant's records indicates entitlement to additional awards that are not shown on his DD Form 214.

9.  Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time when the service member was discharged, required that throughout a qualifying period of service for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal the enlisted person must have had all “excellent” conduct and efficiency ratings and no convictions by a court-martial.  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.  With the publication of the new Army Regulation 672-5-1, in 1974, the requirement for all excellent conduct and efficiency ratings was dropped and an individual was required to show that he/she willingly complied with the demands of the military environment, had been loyal and obedient, and faithfully supported the goals of his organization and the Army.  Today, Army Regulation 600-8-22, which replaced Army Regulation 
672-5-1, notes that there is no automatic entitlement to the Army Good Conduct Medal and disqualification must be justified.  Current practice requires that the commander provide written notice of nonfavorable consideration and permits the individual to respond.

10.  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 Battery C, 2nd Battalion, 19th Artillery,  
1st Cavalry (Airmobile) was awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, based on Department of the Army General Order Number 59, dated 1969 and the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal, First Class Unit Citation based on Department of the Army General Order Number 42, dated 1972.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his records should be corrected to show the award of the CIB.

2.  The evidence shows the applicant was not assigned as an Infantryman while assigned to an infantry unit of brigade, regimental, or smaller size.  In order for the applicant to qualify for the CIB he had to 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.

3.  There is no evidence to show that the applicant was a RTO or was he awarded the MOS.  The applicant held the MOS 13B; therefore, he is not entitled to correction of his records to show the CIB.

4.  Records show he is entitled to the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 3 November 1967 to 31 October 1969 based on completion of a period of qualifying service of less than three years, but more than one year, ending with the termination of a period of Federal military service. His records do not contain any adverse information and he received conduct and efficiency ratings of “excellent” throughout his service.  Therefore he is entitled to correction of his records to show this award.

5.  Evidence shows that, while the applicant was assigned to Battery C,  
2nd Battalion, 19th Artillery, 1st Cavalry (Airmobile), the unit was awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation and the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal, First Class Unit Citation.  Therefore, the applicant is entitled to correction of his records to show these foreign unit awards.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

___lcb___  ___eif___  ___mjnt    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.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by showing the awards of Army Good Conduct Medal first award for the period 
3 November 1967 to 31 October 1969, Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation and the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal, First Class Unit Citation.

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 CIB.  

3.  The Board wants the applicant and all others concerned to know that this action in no way diminishes the sacrifices made by the applicant in service to our Nation.  The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of his service in arms.




__________Larry C. Bergquist____________
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20070004244
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
20070911
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE
YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR . . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
PARTIAL GRANT
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.