| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Jessie B. Strickland | Analyst |
| Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Regan K. Smith | Member | |
| Mr. Antonio Uribe | Member |
2. The applicant requests that he be awarded the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB).
3. The applicant states, in effect, that he was awarded the CIB and desires to have it entered in his records. In support of his application he submits a photocopy of an unauthenticated order awarding him the CIB.
4. The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 10 September 1970 for a period of 3 years. He successfully completed his training and was transferred to Vietnam on 24 April 1971 for duty as an air traffic control tower operator. He was assigned to the 365th Aviation Detachment and was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 19 July 1971.
5. He remained in Vietnam until 2 March 1972 when he was transferred to Oakland Army Base, California, for early separation. He was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD) on 3 March 1972 to join a United States Army Reserve (USAR) Unit. He had served 1 year, 9 months and 19 days of total active service and was awarded the National Defense Service Medal (NDSM), the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM) and the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal. His records also show that he was awarded the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16); however, it was not entered on his report of separation (DD Form 214). His records also show that he had excellent conduct and efficiency ratings and contain no derogatory information.
6. The photocopied order submitted by the applicant with his application is a poor quality unauthenticated copy of an order dated 22 November 1971, which awards the applicant the CIB. The headquarters on the order is a headquarters other than that which the applicant was assigned and in a different location from the applicant's unit of assignment. The order does not contain the official seal used to authenticate orders.
7. The applicant's records also contain a 6 February 1994 letter the applicant wrote to the then Vice President of the United States, in which he sought assistance to obtain awards of the Purple Heart and the CIB. He asserted at that time that he had performed duties as a radio-telephone operator (RTO) with infantry units in Vietnam and that he had been wounded by shrapnel in November 1971. He asserted that at the time of his departure from the Army, he complained that his records (DD Form 214) did not contain any mention of entitlement to a Purple Heart and CIB and the noncommissioned officer in charge dismissed him.
8. Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time, established the criteria for award of the CIB. It states, in pertinent part, that to be eligible for the CIB, an individual must be an infantryman with an infantry military occupational specialty (MOS) and must perform duty as an infantryman, as a member of an infantry unit of brigade or smaller size, during any period in which that unit was engaged in ground combat. Battle participation credit alone is not sufficient.
9. Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time, prescribed Army policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning award of the 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. Disqualification for award of the AGCM requires specific action by the commander in writing, to disqualify a member and it must be referred to the individual for comment.
10. 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 awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm (RVNGC w/palm) Unit Citation and participated in four campaigns during the period the applicant was assigned. One bronze star is authorized for wear on the VSM for each campaign.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. Although the applicant has submitted an unofficial copy of an order awarding him the CIB, the information contained in the order is not consistent with the evidence of record. The evidence of record fails to show that he was ever assigned to an Infantry/Advisory unit or that he performed duties with such units as either an infantryman or an RTO. His records also fail to show that he was ever awarded the military occupational specialty of an infantryman. Accordingly, the Board finds that the order is not valid and there is no basis to award him the CIB.
2. However, the Board does find that his record is absent of evidence to disqualify him for award of the AGCM; therefore, the Board finds that absent such disqualifiers, he should be awarded the AGCM for the period of 10 September 1970 through 3 March 1972.
3. Additionally, he should be awarded the RVNGC w/Palm Unit Citation, four bronze service stars for wear on his already awarded VSM and his records should reflect his award of the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16).
4. 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 AGCM for the period of 10 September 1970 through 3 March 1972, the RVNGC w/Palm Unit Citation, four bronze service stars for wear on his already awarded VSM and by showing that he was awarded the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16).
2. That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.
BOARD VOTE:
__sac ___ ___rks __ __au____ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
___Samuel A. Crumpler___
CHAIRPERSON
| CASE ID | AR2002078256 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2003/02/11 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | GRANT |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 157 | 107.0111/CIB |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002077968C070215
The applicant states that he was wounded in Vietnam on 2 March 1971 and was evacuated to a hospital in Japan. Although the available records do not contain the typical documents required to show that an individual was wounded in combat and that his treatment was made a matter of record, the Board finds the available evidence contained in his records is sufficiently convincing to show that he in fact sustained multiple fragmentation wounds on 2 March 1971 and that he was evacuated to a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090955C070212
The applicant requests that his report of separation (DD Form 214) be corrected to show his awards of the Purple Heart, the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB), the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM), and two bronze service stars to denote his campaign participation. The applicant states, in effect, that he was awarded the Purple Heart, the CIB, the AGCM and two bronze service stars; however, they were not included on his DD Form 214 at the time of his release from active duty (REFRAD). There is...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003091450C070212
After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service, the Board has determined that the applicant should have received the AGCM for his service from 16 November 1967 through 19 October 1969. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the Board determined that this error should be corrected and the applicant should receive the AGCM at this time. The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief and to excuse failure to timely file.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100022262
The applicant states: a. he served two full combat tours in the Vietnam and held military occupational specialty (MOS) 11D; b. he was not awarded a second CIB; and c. all units subordinate to the Military Assistance Command (MACV) serving in Vietnam during the period 8 February to 28 March 1973 and United States Army Vietnam and its subordinate units serving during the period 20 July 1965 to 28 March 1973 were awarded the RVNGC. The evidence of record confirms the applicant served two tours...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080002115
On 12 August 1970, General Orders Number 824, issued by United States Army Support Command QUI NHON awarded the applicant the Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) for the period of September 1969 to August 1970. A review of the available records fails to show any indication that the applicant was awarded the CIB or that he engaged the enemy in combat while assigned as an infantryman to an infantry unit in Vietnam. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003091151C070212
After carefully examining the applicant’s record of service, the Board has determined that the applicant should have received the AGCM for his service from 31 July 1968 through 22 July 1971. BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by awarding him the AGCM for the period of 31 July 1968 through 22 July 1971, the RVNGC w/Palm Unit Citation, the MUC and one silver service star for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090004012
Therefore, it would be appropriate to award him the AGCM for his qualifying period of honorable active duty service from 3 February 1969 through 7 September 1970 and to add this award to his record and DD Form 214. The applicants DA Form 20 confirms that throughout his assignment to the RVN, he held and served in an artillery MOS with an artillery unit. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by awarding him the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110015391
The applicant did not serve in an infantry MOS during his service in Vietnam. In light of his overall record of service, it would be appropriate to award him the first award of the AGCM based on completion of a qualifying period of active Federal service from 13 November 1969 to 24 March 1972 and to correct his DD Form 214 to show this award. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. awarding him the AGCM (1st...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040004157C070208
Linda M. Barker | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief and to excuse failure to timely file. The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004100604C070208
He had served 1 year and 14 days of total active service and his DD Form 214 issued at the time of his REFRAD shows that he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM), the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal and the CIB. The evidence also shows that the applicant had excellent conduct and efficiency ratings throughout his service and his records contain no derogatory information that would serve to disqualify him for award of the GCMDL. As a result, the...