RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:



      BOARD DATE:          18 August 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040009556


      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             |
|     |Mr. Jessie B. Strickland          |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. James E. Vick                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Ronald J. Weaver              |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Robert Rogers                 |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests that he be awarded the Combat Medical Badge
(CMB).

2.  The applicant states that he trained to be a medic in Vietnam and
served with distinction in that capacity.  However, he has never received
the CMB that he deserves and is entitled to receive.

3.  The applicant provides letters from an officer and a noncommissioned
officer who were responsible for training him as a medic.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  He enlisted in Oakland, California, on 19 September 1968 for a period
of 2 years.  He successfully completed his training and was transferred to
Vietnam on 7 July 1969.  He was initially assigned to Headquarters and
Headquarters Company, 1st Battalion, 52nd Infantry Regiment, 198th Infantry
Brigade, for duty as a light weapons infantryman in military occupational
specialty (MOS) 11B.  The applicant also had a secondary MOS (SMOS) of 11F
– Infantry Intelligence and operations specialist.

2.  Two weeks later he was transferred to Company C of the same battalion
for duty as a forward observer in MOS 11C.  He was advanced to the pay
grade of E-4 on 5 November 1969.

3.  On 1 February 1970, orders were published which awarded the applicant
and 32 other Soldiers the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB).  Those orders
also awarded 10 other Soldiers the CMB.

4.  On 15 April 1970, the applicant sustained missile wounds to the chest
and was evacuated to the 249th General Hospital in Japan and then was
transferred to Letterman General Hospital in San Francisco, California,
where he remained until 26 June 1970, when he was honorably released from
active duty (REFRAD).  He had served 1 year, 9 months and 8 days of total
active service.  His report of separation (DD Form 214) issued at the time
of his REFRAD shows that he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal,
the CIB, the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM), the Army Commendation Medal and
the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal.

5.  A review of the applicant’s records also shows that he was awarded the
Purple Heart on 16 April 1970 and that he had excellent conduct and
efficiency ratings throughout his service.  There is however, no evidence
to show that he served as a medic or was awarded the MOS of a medical
corpsman, which at that time was 91A or a medical specialist in MOS 91B.
His record is also void of any derogatory information that would serve to
disqualify him for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal (GCMDL).

6.  The letters submitted by the applicant with his application from his
former battalion surgeon and platoon sergeant serve to explain that the
applicant was assigned to the unit as an infantry operations and
intelligence specialist.  However, there was no slot for that MOS so he was
given on-the-job training as a medic, an MOS for which there was a great
shortage.  The battalion surgeon who is now a physician in private practice
asserts that the applicant served with distinction as a combat medic and
that he is deserving of the award of the CMB.

7.  Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time, established the
criteria for award of the Combat Infantryman Badge (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.

8.  Army Regulation 672-5-1 also provided the criteria for award of the
CMB.  It states, in pertinent part, that the CMB was created by the War
Department on 1 March 1945 and the intent was that it was created as a
companion badge to the CIB, with criteria for its award to parallel that of
the CIB.  Its evolution stemmed from a requirement to recognize officers,
warrant officers and enlisted men of the Medical Department assigned to the
medical detachment of infantry units who shared the same hazards and
hardships of ground combat on a daily basis with infantry soldiers.  As
with the CIB, the infantry unit to which the medical personnel are assigned
or attached must engage the enemy in active ground combat.  The medical
personnel must be personally present and under fire to be eligible for
award of the CMB.  If a soldier has been awarded the CIB for service in any
of the Vietnam era areas, that soldier is not eligible to earn the CMB
(paragraph 8-6 d.(1).

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 outlines the criteria for award of the Good
Conduct Medal (GCMDL).  It states, in pertinent part, that the GCMDL is
awarded for exemplary behavior, efficiency, and fidelity in active Federal
military service.  It is awarded on a selective basis to each Soldier who
distinguishes him or herself from among their fellow soldiers by their
exemplary conduct, efficiency, and fidelity throughout their service.
There is no right or entitlement to the medal until the immediate commander
has approved the award and the award has been announced in permanent
orders.  Separation transfer points will review records of enlisted
personnel being separated to determine whether they qualify for award of
the GCMDL.  Where possible, a reasonable effort will be made to contact the
unit commander prior to awarding the medal to qualified members

10.  Army Regulation 611-201, in effect at the time, provided the criteria
for award of enlisted military occupational specialties.  It provided, in
pertinent part, that formal training was required for all 91 series
(medical) military occupational specialties (MOS). The only exception was
for those personnel who had received formal civilian training and were
certified/licensed for the specialty in which they were enlisting.  There
were no provisions then, nor is there now, for on-the-job training in order
to qualify for award of a medical specialty MOS.

11.  Department of the 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 subsequent to the applicant’s departure from Vietnam, his
unit was awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm (RVNGC
w/Palm) Unit Citation for the period he served with the unit.
Additionally, he participated in two campaigns while assigned to Vietnam
and is authorized to wear two bronze service stars on his already awarded
VSM.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Although the applicant may have performed the duties of a medic in
Vietnam, he was not qualified to be awarded the MOS of a medical corpsman
by virtue of his lack of formal training that was required for award of
that MOS.  As such, he was ineligible to be awarded the CMB.  However, the
applicant was a qualified infantryman serving in an infantry unit and as
such was awarded the CIB.

2.  Inasmuch as the applicable regulation specifies that an individual may
be awarded either the CIB or the CMB during the Vietnam Era, not both, the
applicant was only entitled to be awarded only one of the two badges in
question.

3.  Based on the available evidence, the applicant was awarded the badge
that was most appropriate to his qualifications at the time and there is no
basis to grant him an additional award of the CMB that was clearly not
authorized.

4.  The evidence does however establish that he was awarded the Purple
Heart and that award was not included on his DD Form 214 at the time of his
separation.  Therefore, it would be appropriate to do so at this time.

5.  The evidence of record also establishes that he had excellent conduct
and efficiency ratings throughout his service and there is no derogatory
information that would serve to disqualify him for award of the GCMDL for
the period of 19 September 1968 to 26 June 1970.

6.  The Board found that the applicant not receiving the GCMDL was likely
the result of an administrative error as opposed to it being the result of
a conscious disqualification by any of the unit commanders for which he
served.  Therefore, in the interest of justice, the Board determined that
this error should be corrected and the applicant should receive the GCMDL
at this time.

7.  Additionally, the applicant’s unit was subsequently awarded the RVNGC
w/Palm Unit Citation and he participated in two campaigns while serving in
Vietnam.  Accordingly, he is entitled to be awarded the RVNGC w/Palm Unit
Citation and two bronze service stars for wear on his already awarded VSM.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

__jev___  __rjw___  ___rr___  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to
warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board
recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual
concerned be corrected by awarding him the GCMDL for the period of 19
September 1968 to 26 June 1970, the RVNGC w/Palm Unit Citation, two bronze
service stars for wear on his already awarded VSM and by showing that he
was awarded the Purple Heart.

2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is
insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result,
the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to
award of the CMB.



                 James E. Vick
            ______________________
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040009556                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050818                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |(PARTIAL GRANT )                        |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES                  |159/CMB                                 |
|1.107.0113              |                                        |
|2.107.0094              |140/RVNGC                               |
|3.107.0056              |102/GCMDL                               |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]