RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  29 January 2008
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070012880 


	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.


Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano

Director

Mrs. Nancy L. Amos

Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:


Ms. Shirley L. Powell

Chairperson

Mr. Paul M. Smith

Member

Mr. Larry C. Bergquist

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 Infantryman Badge (CIB).

2.  The applicant states that he was in active combat from August 1969 to December 1969.

3.  The applicant provides a letter from his former commander.

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.  The applicant was inducted into the Army on 10 April 1969.  He completed basic combat training and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 12A (Pioneer).

3.  The applicant arrived in Vietnam and was assigned to the Headquarters     and Headquarters Troop (HHT), 1st Squadron, 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment on 11 September 1969.  He performed duties in MOS 12F as a bridge specialist sergeant and in MOS 17K as a radar operator.

4.  On 22 December 1969, the applicant was awarded primary MOS 17K (Ground Surveillance Radar Crewman) and secondary MOS 12F (Combat Engineer Tracked Vehicle Crewman).

5.  The applicant provided a letter from his former troop commander.  The commander stated that the applicant was under his command for 5 months and was active in combat infantry assignments.  Ordinarily, a company-sized support unit like HHT would not have been engaged in combat activities.  However, as part of the 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment the HHT was situated in the field and in the center of the tactical area of operations.  The troop was engaged in active combat patrolling using the field personnel at its disposal.  Additionally, it was required to repel sapper attacks during the night and was the object of mortar and rocket bombardment from the nearby jungle on a number of occasions.  As a crewman on an armored cavalry assault vehicle, the applicant was required to patrol within their local area of operation and to help guard non-combat vehicles.

6.  The applicant departed Vietnam on 4 September 1970 after being credited with participation in four campaigns.

7.  On 9 April 1971, the applicant was honorably released from active duty.  His DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) shows he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, two overseas bars, the Army Commendation Medal, the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge (Rifle M-14), the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge (Rifle M-16), the Vietnam Service Medal with two bronze service stars, and the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960).

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) 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.  The CIB is awarded to infantry officers and to enlisted and warrant officer persons who have an infantry MOS.  They must have served in active ground combat while assigned or attached to an infantry unit of brigade, regimental or smaller size.  The Awards Branch of the U.S. Army Human Resources Command has advised, in similar cases, that during the Vietnam era the CIB was awarded only to enlisted individuals who held and served in MOS 11B, 11C, 11F, 11G, or 11H.

9.  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.  The War Department received requests to award the CIB to non-infantry individuals and units employed as infantry during tactical emergencies.  All of those requests were disapproved based on the fact that the regular infantryman lived, slept, ate, and fought as an infantryman on a continuous and indefinite basis without regard to the tactical situation. 

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 authorizes award of a bronze service star, based on qualifying service, for each campaign listed in Appendix B of this regulation.  Authorized bronze service stars will be worn on the appropriate campaign or service medal, including the Vietnam Service Medal.  

11.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign  Participation Credit Register) lists the unit awards received by units serving in Vietnam.  This document shows that, at the time of the applicant's assignment to the 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment, it was awarded the Valorous Unit Award for the period 1 May through 29 June 1970 on Department of the Army General Orders (DAGO) Number 43, dated 1972.

12.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 shows that, at the time of the applicant’s assignment to the 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment, it was awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation for the period     1 May 1969 through 15 February 1970 on DAGO Number 50, dated 1971.  It was also awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation for the period 1 March through 30 October 1970 on DAGO Number 55, dated 1971.  It states that not more than one Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation will be worn by any individual.  Although multiple awards of this unit citation badge may not be worn, official military personnel and historical records will indicate all awards received.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s service in combat situations is acknowledged; however, he was not an infantryman, he was not assigned to an infantry unit, and he did not perform infantryman duties (i.e., “lived, slept, ate, and fought as an infantryman on a continuous and indefinite basis”).  Therefore, he did not meet the eligibility criteria for award of the Combat Infantryman Badge.

2.  The applicant was assigned a unit during a period of time that unit was awarded the Valorous Unit Award.  That same unit during the time the applicant was assigned to it was also twice awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation.  He is authorized to wear one Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation.  All three of these unit awards should be listed on his DD Form 214.

3.  The applicant was credited with participation in four campaigns.  He is therefore eligible to wear four bronze service stars on his Vietnam Service Medal and his DD Form 214 should be amended to show he is authorized to wear four bronze service stars on his Vietnam Service Medal instead of the two bronze service stars as now reflected on his DD Form 214.
4.  Evidence shows that the applicant’s records contain administrative errors which do not require action by the Board.  Therefore, administrative correction of the applicant’s records will be accomplished by the Case Management Support Division (CMSD), St. Louis, Missouri, as outlined by the Board in paragraph 2 of the BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION section below.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

__slp___  __pms___  __lcb___  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  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 for correction of the records of the individual concerned.

2.  The Board determined that administrative errors in the records of the individual concerned should be corrected.  Therefore, the Board requests that the CMSD-St. Louis administratively correct the records of the individual concerned to amend his DD Form 214 to add the Valorous Unit Award and two awards of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation and to show he is authorized to wear four bronze service stars on his already-awarded Vietnam Service Medal.




__Shirley L. Powell__
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR20070012880
SUFFIX

RECON

DATE BOARDED
20080129
TYPE OF DISCHARGE

DATE OF DISCHARGE

DISCHARGE AUTHORITY

DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
Ms. Mitrano
ISSUES         1.
107.0111
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.