IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	        7 August 2008

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080008577 


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 that his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) be corrected to show award of the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB).

2.  The applicant states the CIB is not on his DD Form 214.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214.

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 enlisted in the Regular Army for 3 years and airborne training on 29 March 1966.  Following Basic Combat Training (BCT) at Fort Dix, NJ, he was transferred to Fort Rucker, AL on/about 1 June 1966 for Advanced Individual Training (AIT).  The record shows that he did not stay at Fort Rucker very long; on/about 24 June 1966, he was again transferred, this time to Fort Benning, GA where he completed AIT and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 31B (Field Communications Electronic Equipment Mechanic).  His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) lists this MOS as "Infantry Radio Mechanic" and "Field Radio Mechanic."

3.  The applicant completed the Basic Airborne Course while at Fort Benning and was awarded the Parachutist Badge.  He was then transferred to Vietnam via Fort Lewis, WA.  He arrived in Vietnam on/about 24 June 1967 and, following in-country training, was assigned to Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 1st Battalion, 327th Infantry until 4 December 1967, when he was reassigned to Company C, 1st Battalion, 327th Infantry.  His principal duty was listed as "Radio Mechanic."

4.  There are no orders in the applicant's records to show he was awarded the CIB.  There are also no orders in his records to show that his MOS was ever changed from 31B to 11B.  However, his DA Form 20 has a pencil entry in Block 22 (Military Occupational Specialties) showing 11B on an unknown date.  Also, he was promoted to Specialist Four in Vietnam.  The promotion order shows his MOS as 11B2P (Airborne Infantryman).

5.  During the processing of this case, a member of the Board staff reviewed the Awards and Decorations Computer Assisted Retrieval System (ADCARS) maintained by the Military Awards Branch of the United States Army Human Resources Command (HRC), which is an index of general orders issued during the Vietnam era between 1965 and 1973.  This review failed to reveal any CIB orders on file for the applicant by name or service number.

6.  The CIB was established by War Department Circular 269 in 1943 to recognize and provide an incentive to infantrymen.  The CIB was awarded for exemplary conduct in action against the enemy.  War Department Circular 186, dated 1944, further provided that the CIB was to be awarded only to infantrymen serving with infantry units of brigade, regimental or smaller size.  The Awards Branch, US Army Human Resources Command (HRC), Alexandria, VA has advised in similar cases that, during World War II, the CIB was normally awarded only to enlisted individuals who served in the following positions:

	a.  Light machine gunner (604);

	b.  Heavy machine gunner (605);

	c.  Platoon sergeant (651);

	d.  Squad leader (653);

	e.  Rifleman (745);

	f.  Automatic rifleman (746);

	g.  Heavy weapons NCO (812); and

	h.  Gun crewman (864).

7.  All Soldiers are provided basic combat skills training after they enter the Army.  This is provided to insure that all Soldiers have the survival skills to perform basic infantry missions when the need arises.  However, no other Soldier in combat is more exposed on a daily basis to the dangers and hardships of war, and no other branch of the service suffers more casualties than the infantry.  To maintain the prestige, uniqueness, and traditional value of the CIB, the criteria for award has changed little over the years.  The HRC opinion does note that the exigencies of combat may require non-infantry Soldiers to temporarily perform the basic infantry duties that all Soldiers are taught, but it is not a basis for the award of the CIB.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part, that during the Vietnam War, the CIB was awarded to infantry officers and to enlisted and warrant officer personnel who had 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 HRC 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.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant requests the CIB be added to his DD Form 214.

2.  There are no orders in the applicant's records to show he was awarded the CIB and a search of ADCARS failed to reveal any orders for the CIB.

3.  The applicant was a school-trained 31B and it appears from his service records that he performed duties as a 31B while in Vietnam.  Although one order, the order promoting him to Specialist Four, lists his MOS as 11B, and one entry on his DA Form 20 suggests that, at an unknown time, he was an 11B, these entries are insufficient to make the requested correction.
4.  The Board wants the applicant and all others concerned to know that this action in no way diminishes the sacrifices made by the applicant in service to our Nation.  The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of his service in arms.  

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__xxx___  __xxx___  __xxx___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

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.



																XXX
      _______ _   _______   ___
               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)                                         AR20080008577



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080008577



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1