BOARD DATE: 28 September 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160002844 BOARD VOTE: _________ _______ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____x____ ____x____ ____x____ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration BOARD DATE: 28 September 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160002844 BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. _____________x____________ 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. BOARD DATE: 28 September 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20160002844 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 correction of his records to show award of Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB). 2. He states that as a Military Intelligence (MI) Officer, he met all the same criteria for award of the CIB as all of his fellow Infantry team members who received the CIB. 3. He provides: * Special Orders Number 57 * DA Form 67-5 (U.S. Army Officer Efficiency Report) 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. On 27 March 1967, the applicant was appointed as a Reserve commissioned officer in the rank of second lieutenant. 3. Item 18 (Record of Assignments) of his DA Form 66 (Officer Qualification Record) shows he served in Vietnam from 16 August 1967 until 9 March 1969. During this period he was assigned to the 135th MI Group as a Special Agent and the U.S. Military Assistance Command Vietnam (MACV) as an Intelligence Officer. 4. The applicant provides his DA Form 67-5 for the period 28 July 1967 through 1 February 1968, which shows that his primary duties included “acting as the District Senior Advisor” for a short period of time at Phuoc Binh District where he participated in combat operations with the Territorial Forces under the District Chief. In addition, his accurate requests for and adjusting of artillery fire while in heavy contact attested to his ability to remain calm and levelheaded regardless of the circumstances. 5. He also provides Special Orders Number 57, issued by MACV, dated 26 February 1969, which amended Special Order 100, dated 9 April 1968, to show his primary duties while assigned to the Advisory Team 67 included performing the duties of the tactical advisor to Vietnamese Army/Government of Vietnam infantry type units in the district area of responsibility to include frequent participation in ground combat operations. The available records do not contain his efficiency report for this period. 6. He was released from active duty on 5 October 1978. He completed subsequent active duty service and retired on 30 April 1986. 7. His record is void of orders awarding him the CIB. REFERENCES: 1. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states that during the Vietnam Conflict, subsequent to 1 March 1961, any officer, warrant officer, or enlisted Soldier whose branch is other than Infantry will be eligible for award of the CIB provided all requirements have been met: a. Assigned as advisor to an Infantry unit, Ranger unit, Infantry-type unit of the civil guard of regimental or smaller size, and/or Infantry-type unit of the self-defense corps unit of regimental or smaller size of the Vietnamese government during any period such unit was engaged in actual ground combat. b. Assigned as advisor of an irregular force comparable to the above Infantry units under similar conditions. c. Personally present and under fire while serving in an assigned primary duty as a member of a tactical advisory team while the unit participated in ground combat. 2. The U. S. Army Vietnam (USARV) Regulation 672-1 (Decorations and Awards), in effect at the time, states recommendation for award of the CIB will include information such as the individual's primary duty position title as entered in the personnel records, the dates the individual came under fire, and type of operation being conducted. The regulation lists the primary duty of District Advisor and Operations/Intelligence Advisor as a qualifying duty for award of the CIB. However, the primary duty of Intelligence Advisor was not eligible for award of the CIB although, in the performance of their duties, these individuals may have accompanied infantry or infantry-type units on operations. DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant was an MI officer. He provides his efficiency report for the period July 1967 through February 1968, which shows his primary duty was as the Officer in Charge of the District Intelligence and Operations Coordinating Center, MACV, and that he briefly performed additional duties as the District Advisor and participated in combat operations. 2. He also provides orders, dated 9 April 1968, which show that his primary duty was as a Tactical Advisor to ARVN infantry-type units while assigned to Advisory Team 67, MACV, effective on or about 9 February 1968. There is no evidence that he participated in ground combat during this period. 3. The Board must determine if a preponderance of the evidence shows the applicant met the eligibility criteria for award of the CIB while assigned to advisory duties in Vietnam. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160002844 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20160002844 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2