IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 12 August 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080010301 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 reconsideration of the Board’s denial of his request for the award of the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB). 2. The applicant states, in effect, that the fact that he had been awarded the Bronze Star Medal for meritorious achievement and was authorized three bronze service stars to be worn on his Vietnam Service Medal shows that his entire service record has been compromised in one way or another. He believes that alterations were made and hidden. In addition, information relevant to his records was not always made available to him or disclosed in detail prior to his review. 3. Based on this synopsis, the fact that the CIB was lined out in Item 41 of his DA Form 20 raises questions in his mind. The applicant asks the Board to research documents which would provide evidence that he was wounded in combat and then grant his request based on that evidence. 4. The applicant provides a document providing a list of names of individuals who served in Vietnam around the same time he served in Vietnam. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20070007100 on 15 November 2007. 2. In its original consideration of this case, the Board considered the fact that the applicant served the majority of his tour in Vietnam with Headquarters and Headquarters Company (19 August 1971-1 March 1972), 2nd Battalion, 506th Infantry Regiment. The Board also considered the fact that the applicant’s DA Form 20 contains a lined out CIB entry in the awards block, which indicates the applicant did not receive the award, and the applicant last audited the DA Form 20 on 19 April 1972, a month after he completed his Vietnam tour. The Board concluded that the applicant’s audit of the DA Form 20 was his verification that the information contained on the record was correct at that time. 3. The Board also noted that, based on an award audit of the applicant’s records, the Bronze Star Medal, Air Medal, and 3 bronze service stars to be worn on his already awarded Vietnam Service Medal were omitted from his DD Form 214. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant has not provided any new evidence in support of his request for the CIB. He does provide new argument which requires the Board to reconsider his request. 2. The applicant’s new argument is the fact that he was not aware that he was entitled to the Bronze Star Medal and 3 bronze service stars to be worn on his Vietnam Service Medal is indicative that someone tampered with his military records. Therefore, the fact that the CIB was entered on his DA Form 20 and that entry was lined out is suspect. 3. In this regard, omissions of awards were commonplace during the Vietnam era. Such omissions are certainly not indicative of records tampering in and of itself. The applicant has not provided any evidence that his records were tampered with. 4. The applicant was assigned to a headquarters company for the majority of his Vietnam tour, he has not submitted any evidence to show he was wounded in combat, his records do not contain any documentation which would show he was wounded, and the applicant audited his DA Form 20 on 19 April 1972, a month after he completed his Vietnam tour. 5. As such, the applicant has still not submitted evidence or argument which would warrant granting his request for the CIB. 6. As for the applicant’s request for the Board to research military records to find evidence that he was wounded, the Board is not an investigative agency. The Board begins its review of a case with a presumption of regularity, that what the Army did was correct. The burden of proving otherwise lies with the applicant. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ___X____ ___X____ __X____ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20070007100 on 15 November 2007. _______ _ 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. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080010301 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080010301 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1