IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 10 June 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080001237 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that his records be corrected to reflect his awards of the Bronze Star Medal (BSM), the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB), the Good Conduct Medal (GCMDL) and any other awards to which he is entitled and were not listed on his DD Form 214. 2. The applicant states, in effect, that he is entitled to awards of the BSM, the CIB and the GCMDL and desires them and any other awards to which he is entitled to be added to his DD Form 214. 3. The applicant provides a copy of 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 enlisted in Baltimore, Maryland on 21 June 1965 for a period of 3 years. He completed his basic training at Fort Dix, New Jersey, his advanced individual training as an infantry indirect fire crewman at Fort Gordon, Georgia and his airborne training at Fort Benning, Georgia before he was transferred to Fort Bragg, North Carolina to undergo special forces training as a combat engineer. He went on temporary duty for training at Fort Belvoir, Virginia and was subsequently returned for assignment at Fort Bragg in military occupational specialty (MOS) 12B3S, a special forces qualified combat engineer. 3. On 11 December 1966, he was transferred to Germany for assignment to the Berlin Brigade. He was promoted to the pay grade of E-5 on 16 December 1966. 4. On 3 January 1968, he was transferred to Vietnam for assignment to Headquarters and Headquarters Company (Recondo), 5th Special Forces Group, for duty as a combat engineer. He served in Vietnam until 10 June 1968 when he was transferred to Oakland Army Base, California, where he was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD) as an overseas returnee on 12 June 1968. He had served 2 years, 11 months and 22 days of total active service and his DD Form 214 shows that he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, the Parachutist Badge, the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM), the Vietnam Campaign Medal and the Army Occupation Medal. 5. Meanwhile, on 8 June 1968, General Orders Number 966, issued by Headquarters, 5th Special Forces Group awarded the applicant the BSM for meritorious service during the period of 10 January to 13 June 1968. However, that award was never added to his DD Form 214. 6. A review of his records fails to show that he was awarded the CIB; however, his records do show that he had excellent conduct and efficiency ratings throughout his service and there is no derogatory information in his records that would serve to disqualify him for award of the Good Conduct Medal (GCMDL). 7. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy and procedures concerning awards. Paragraph 8-6 provides for award of the Combat Infantryman Badge. That paragraph states that there are basically three requirements for award of the Combat Infantryman Badge. 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 or special forces specialty, satisfactorily performed duty while assigned or attached as a member of an infantry, ranger or special forces unit of brigade, regimental, or smaller size during any period such unit was engaged in active ground combat. Eligibility for special forces personnel (less the special forces medical sergeant) accrues from 20 December 1989. Retroactive awards for special forces personnel are not authorized. A recipient must be personally present and under hostile fire while serving in an assigned infantry or special forces primary duty, in a unit actively engaged in ground combat with the enemy. 8. Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time, established the criteria for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM). It states, in pertinent part, that the AGCM was established by Executive Order 8809, 28 June 1941 and was amended by Executive Order 9323, 1943 and by Executive Order 10444, 10 April 1953 and is awarded for exemplary behavior, efficiency, and fidelity in active Federal military service. The regulation also states, in pertinent part, that for first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June 1950, a period of service of less than 3 years but more than 1 year qualifies for award of the AGCM. There is no automatic entitlement to the award of the GCMDL. 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 Presidential Unit Citation (PUC), the Meritorious Unit Commendation (MUC), the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm (RVNGC w/Palm) Unit Citation and the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal – First Class Unit Citation (RVNCAHM-FC) during the period he was assigned to the unit. Additionally, he participated in three campaigns while assigned to Vietnam and is entitled to be awarded three bronze service stars for wear on his already-awarded VSM. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant was awarded the award of the BSM in properly published orders and that award was omitted from his DD Form 214 at the time of his REFRAD. Accordingly, it would be in the interest of justice to add that award to his records at this time. 2. The applicant’s contention that he is entitled to award of the CIB has been noted; however, the applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted with his application and the evidence of record that he was ever awarded the CIB or that he was qualified for award of the CIB. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to establish his eligibility for award of the CIB, there appears to be no basis to award him the CIB at this time. 3. However, after carefully examining the applicant’s record of service, it was determined that the applicant should have received the GCMDL for his service from 21 June 1965 through 12 June 1968. 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. 4. The applicant not receiving the GCMDL was likely the result of an administrative error as opposed to it being the result of a conscious disqualification by any of the unit commanders for which he served. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the Board determined that this error should be corrected and the applicant should receive the GCMDL at this time. 5. Additionally, the evidence of record also establishes that the applicant is entitled to awards of the PUC, the MUC, the RVNGC w/Palm Unit Citation, the RVNCAHM-FC Unit Citation, and three bronze service stars for wear on his already-awarded VSM. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF __XXX __ __XXX__ __XXX__ 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 awarding him the GCMDL for the period of 21 June 1965 to 12 June 1968, while serving in the rank of specialist five (E-5), by awarding him the PUC, the MUC, the RVNGC w/Palm Unit Citation, the RVNCAHM-FC Unit Citation, and three bronze service stars for wear on his already-awarded VSM, and by adding his award of the BSM to his records as well. 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 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 the United States during the Vietnam War. The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of his service in arms. ___ XXX ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080001237 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080001237 5 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1