PROCEEDINGS


         IN THE CASE OF:
        

         BOARD DATE: 19 September 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002074500


         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.

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director
Ms. Nancy L. Amos		Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Ms. JoAnn H. Langston		Chairperson
Ms. Melinda M. Darby		Member
Mr. Ronald E. Blakely		Member

         The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military
records
         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS :

1. The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

---

2. The applicant requests that he be awarded the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB).

3. The applicant states that he was with the 31st Combat Engineers in Vietnam and for the first six months his unit was attached to the 11th Armored Cavalry. It seemed the Engineers would build a bridge during the day and the Viet Cong would blow it up at night. Base camp would receive almost daily mortar attacks and he would have to scramble to protect the perimeter. On more than one occasion he was sent out to repair an armored personnel carrier and they would receive enemy fire. At that moment he would be alongside an 11B (light weapons infantryman) returning fire. His last six months his unit was attached to the 1st Air Cavalry. They would set up base camp and engage the enemy if necessary. While on guard duty he would go outside the perimeter and set claymores. Although his military occupational specialty (MOS) was not 11B he is trying to show that he was in a multitude of combat situations performing the same duties as the 11B.

4. The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 6 February 1967. He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was awarded MOS 63H (Automotive Repairman).

5. The applicant's unit, Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 31st Engineer Battalion, arrived in Vietnam on or about 5 April 1968. His Enlisted Qualification Record, DA Form 20, shows that he performed principal duties as a wheel vehicle mechanic. He departed Vietnam on 31 March 1969 after being credited with four campaigns.

6. The applicant was released from active duty on 5 February 1970 after completing 3 years of creditable active service. His DA Form 20 shows that his conduct and efficiency were rated as excellent throughout his enlistment. His DD Form 214 shows he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal, the Vietnam Campaign Medal, the Unit Commendation Award (Commanders), and the Army Commendation Medal.

7. The applicant's DA Form 20 and orders show that he was awarded the Mechanic Badge with bar, the Expert Qualification Badge Rifle M-16, the Marksman Qualification Badge Pistol, and the Sharpshooter Qualification Badge Rifle M-14.

8. Army Regulation 600-8-22 prescribes Army policy and criteria concerning individual military awards. In pertinent part, it states that 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. 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. 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.

9. Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides for the wear of one bronze service star on the appropriate service medal for each credited campaign.

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

11. Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 shows that the 31st Engineer Battalion was awarded the Meritorious Unit Commendation (MUC) for the period 1 May through 31 December 1968 and the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal, First Class Unit Citation for the period 15 April 1968 through 9 February 1970. (The MUC is not the same as the Unit Commendation Award (Commanders) entry on the applicant's DD Form 214, for which award General Orders are in his records.)

12. Department of the Army General Orders 8, 1974, announced award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation to Headquarters, U. S. Military Assistance Command and its subordinate units during the period 8 February 1962 to 28 March 1973 and to Headquarters, U. S. Army Vietnam and its subordinate units during the period 20 July 1965 to 28 March 1973.

CONCLUSIONS:

1. The Board appreciates the applicant's service in Vietnam wherein he performed numerous assignments that led him into contact with the enemy and service beside infantrymen. However, he was not an infantryman. His daily mission was not to close with and destroy the enemy and to seize and hold terrain but to provide support to those soldiers whose mission it was. Therefore, he did not meet the eligibility criteria for award of the Combat Infantryman Badge.

2. The applicant met the eligibility criteria for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 6 February 1967 through 5 February 1970. He met the eligibility criteria to wear four bronze service stars on the Vietnam Service Medal.

3. In addition to those awards already listed on his DD Form 214, the applicant's DA Form 20 showed that he was additionally awarded the Mechanic Badge with bar, the Expert Qualification Badge Rifle M-16, the Marksman Qualification Badge Pistol, and the Sharpshooter Qualification Badge Rifle M-14.

4. The applicant was assigned to a unit during a period of time that unit was awarded the Meritorious Unit Commendation, the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal, First Class Unit Citation and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation. He is authorized to wear these unit awards, also.

5. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by awarding him the Army Good Conduct Medal for the period 6 February 1967 through 5 February 1970.

2. That the applicant's DD Form 214 be amended to add the Army Good Conduct Medal, the Meritorious Unit Commendation, the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal, First Class Unit Citation, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, the Driver and Mechanic Badge with Mechanic bar, the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle bar, the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Pistol bar and the Sharpshooter Qualification Badge with Rifle bar and to show he is authorized to wear four bronze service stars with the Vietnam Service Medal.

3. That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:

__JHL__ __MDM__ ___REB__ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION




                  ___JoAnn H. Langston _
                  CHAIRPERSON

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002074500
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED	2002/09/19
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
DATE OF DISCHARGE
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION	PARTIAL GRANT
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1.	107.0111
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.