BOARD DATE: 12 April 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100024120 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, in effect, award of the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB) and its addition to his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge). 2. He states he held military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman). He contends he was told by U.S. Military Assistance Command, Vietnam (MACV), that he had to be on a 30-day combat mission in order to be eligible for award of the CIB. He states he earned the CIB along with his entire platoon. 3. He did not provide any additional evidence. 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. He enlisted in the Regular Army on 9 January 1968. Upon completion of basic combat and advanced individual training, he was awarded MOS 11B. 3. His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows: a. in item 31 (Foreign Service) – he served in Vietnam from 26 June 1968 to 26 June 1969; b. in item 38 (Record of Assignments) – he was assigned to Advisory Team 37, MACV, and served in duty MOS 11B as a security guard; and c. in item 41 (Awards and Decorations) – no indication he was awarded the CIB. 4. His DD Form 214 shows he was honorably released from active duty on 8 January 1971 after completing 3 years of net active service and 1 year of foreign service. Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) does not show he was awarded the CIB. 5. His record is void of evidence which shows he served in active ground combat and is also void of any orders or other documents indicating he was ever recommended for or awarded the CIB by proper authority while serving in Vietnam. 6. A review of the Awards and Decorations Computer-Assisted Retrieval System, an index of general orders issued during the Vietnam era between 1965 and 1973 maintained by the Military Awards Branch of the U.S. Army Human Resources Command, failed to reveal any orders for the CIB. 7. U.S. Army Vietnam Regulation 672-1 (Awards and Decorations) governed award of the CIB to Army forces operating in South Vietnam. This regulation specifically stated that criteria for award of the CIB identified the Soldier who trained, lived, and fought as an infantryman and the CIB is the unique award established to recognize the infantryman and only the infantryman for his service. Further, "the CIB was not an award for being shot at or for undergoing the hazards of day-to-day combat." This regulation also stated the CIB was authorized for award to infantry officers and to enlisted and warrant officer persons who have an infantry MOS and required that they must have served in active ground combat while assigned or attached to an infantry unit of brigade, regimental, or smaller size. 8. MACV Directive 672-1 (Awards and Decorations) provided for award of the CIB. Appendix 3 to annex A of this directive listed positions in MACV which were considered infantry positions and for which award of the CIB was authorized. This annex also listed personnel who were not eligible for award of the CIB although, in the performance of their duties, they may have accompanied infantry or infantry-type units on operations. Security guard was listed among these positions. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. Although the available evidence shows he was assigned to a qualifying unit and served in MOS 11B in Vietnam, his DA Form 20 shows he served as a security guard which was not a qualifying position for award of the CIB. His record is also absent of evidence and he has not provided sufficient evidence to show he was engaged in active ground combat. 2. In view of the foregoing, he is not entitled to the requested relief. 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 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. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100024120 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20100024120 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1