RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        13 September 2007
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070005620


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

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Thomas A. Pagan               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Eric N. Andersen              |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Paul M. Smith                 |     |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 the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB) be added
to his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or
Discharge).

2.  The applicant states he received the CIB, but it is not reflected on
his DD Form 214.

3.  The applicant provides his DD Form 214.

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 was inducted into the Army on 12 December 1963.  He
completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was
awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 111.10 (Light Weapons
Infantryman).

3.  The applicant arrived in Vietnam and was assigned to Headquarters and
Headquarters Company (HHC), 3d Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division on or about
 17 September 1965.  His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record),
version dated 1 November 1954, shows he performed duties as a senior scout
observer. His DA Form 20, version dated 1 January 1965 (and not signed by
the applicant), shows he performed duties as a light weapons infantryman.

4.  The applicant departed Vietnam on 4 December 1965 after being credited
with participation in one campaign.

5.  On 11 December 1965, the applicant was honorably released from active
duty, in the rank and grade of Specialist Four, E-4, after completing 2
years of creditable active service with no lost time.  His DD Form 214
shows he was awarded the Vietnam Service Medal, the Expert Marksmanship
Qualification Badge (Rifle M-14), and the Marksman Marksmanship
Qualification Badge (Rifle M-16).

6.  There are no orders for the CIB in the applicant’s records.

7.  There is no derogatory information in the applicant’s records.  His
conduct and efficiency were rated as “excellent” throughout his service.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states the CIB was
established during World War II to provide special recognition of the
unique role of the Army infantryman, the only Soldier whose daily mission
is to close with and destroy the enemy and to seize and hold terrain.  The
badge was intended as an inducement for individuals to join the infantry
while serving as a morale booster for infantrymen.

9.  In developing the CIB, the War Department did not dismiss or ignore the
contributions of other branches.  Their vital contributions to the overall
war effort were noted, but it was decided that other awards and decorations
were sufficient to recognize their contributions.  From the beginning, Army
leadership have taken care to retain the badge for the unique purpose for
which it was established.  The War Department received requests to award
the CIB to non-infantry individuals and units employed as infantry during
tactical emergencies.  All of those requests were disapproved based on the
fact that the regular infantryman lived, slept, ate, and fought as an
infantryman on a continuous and indefinite basis without regard to the
tactical situation.

10.  At the close of World War II, a review was conducted of the CIB
criteria with consideration being given to creating either additional
badges or authorizing the CIB to cavalry and armor units.  The review noted
that any change would detract from the prestige of the badge.

11.  There are basically three requirements for award of the CIB.  The
Soldier must be an infantryman satisfactorily performing infantry duties,
must be 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.

12.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 states the National Defense Service Medal is
awarded for honorable active service for any period between 27 June 1950
and 27 July 1954, both dates inclusive; between 1 January 1961 and 24
August 1974, both dates inclusive; between 2 August 1990 and 30 November
1995, both dates inclusive; and between 11 September 2001 and to a date to
be determined.
13.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides for the wear of one bronze service
star on the appropriate service medal, to include the Vietnam Service
Medal, for each campaign participation credited.

14.  Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time, provided policy and
criteria concerning individual military decorations.  It stated 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.

15.  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 HHC, 3d Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division, it was
cited for award of the Presidential Unit Citation for the period 23 October
through 26 November 1965 by Department of the Army General Orders (DAGO)
Number 40, dated 1967.

16.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 also shows that, at the time of
the applicant’s assignment to HHC, 3d Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division, it was
cited for award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit
Citation for the period 9 August 1965 through 19 May 1969 on DAGO Number
59, dated 1969.

17.  Currently, MOS 19D, Cavalry Scout, is designated as an Armor career
management field.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contention that he received the CIB is noted.  However,
orders for the CIB are not filed in his records.

2.  The applicant’s DA Form 20, version dated 1 January 1965 shows he
performed duties as a light weapons infantryman.  However, his DA Form 20,
version dated 1 November 1954, shows he performed duties as a senior scout
observer.  There are three criteria for award of the CIB:  the Soldier must
be an infantryman satisfactorily performing infantry duties, must be
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.





3.  As there is some evidence of record to show the applicant did not
perform infantry duties for the 3 and one-half months he was in Vietnam and
as there is no evidence that the applicant actively participated in ground
combat as a member of an infantry unit, there is insufficient evidence to
show he met the eligibility criteria for award of the CIB.

4.  The applicant was assigned to a unit during a period of time that unit
was awarded the Presidential Unit Citation and the Republic of Vietnam
Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation.  These unit awards should be added
to his DD Form 214.

5.  The applicant was credited with participation in one campaign;
therefore, he is eligible to wear one bronze service star on his Vietnam
Service Medal.  His
DD Form 214 should be amended to reflect this.

6.  The applicant met the eligibility criteria for award of the National
Defense Service Medal.  This award should be added to his DD Form 214.

7.  The applicant was honorably released from active duty after completing
       2 years of creditable active service with no lost time and no
derogatory information in his records.  His conduct and efficiency had been
rated as “excellent” throughout his service.  It appears he met the
eligibility criteria for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

__tap___  __ena___  __pms__  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:

     a.  awarding him the first award of the Army Good Conduct Medal for
the period 12 December 1963 through 11 December 1965; and

     b.  amending his DD Form 214 to add the Army Good Conduct Medal, the
National Defense Service Medal, the Presidential Unit Citation, and the
Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation and to show he
is authorized to wear one bronze service star on his already-awarded
Vietnam Service Medal.

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
amending his DD Form 214 to add the Combat Infantryman Badge.




                            __Thomas A. Pagan_____
                                      CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20070005620                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20070913                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |GRANT                                   |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Ms. Mitrano                             |
|ISSUES         1.       |107.0111                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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