IN THE CASE OF:	

		BOARD DATE:	  4 March 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090014635 


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 correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show award of either the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB) or the Combat Action Ribbon (CAR).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that should be awarded either the CIB or the CAR based upon his exposure to combat situations during his service in the Republic of Vietnam.

3.  The applicant provides no documentary evidence in support of his application; however, he indicates there may be evidence in the historical records of his former unit.

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's record shows he was inducted into the Army of the United States and he entered active duty on 8 February 1967.  He completed basic combat and advanced individual training.  Upon completion of training he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman).  On 23 June 1968 he was reclassified into primary MOS 76Y (Armorer/Unit Supply Specialist).  His previous MOS of 11B was withdrawn.  The highest rank/grade he attained while serving on active duty was specialist (SP4)/E-4.  He was released from active duty at the expiration of his term of service and he was transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group (Annual Training) to complete his remaining Reserve obligation.  He completed   2 years of active service this period.

3.  Item 31 (Foreign Service) of the applicant's DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows he served in the Republic of Vietnam during the period 9 July 1967 to 4 July 1968.

4.  Item 38 (Record of Assignments) of the applicant's DA Form 20 shows that during his tour of duty in the Republic of Vietnam, he was initially assigned to Company C, 3rd Battalion, 22nd Infantry Regiment, 25th Infantry Division, for duty in MOS 11B as a Rifleman from 18 July 1967 until 27 October 1967.  Next, he was assigned to Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 25th Supply and Transportation Battalion, 25th Infantry Division for duty in MOS 76Y as a General Supply Specialist from 28 October 1967 until 9 December 1967.  He completed his tour in the Republic of Vietnam assigned to Detachment 1, 25th Adjutant General Replacement Detachment in an excess status.

5.  Item 41 (Awards and Decorations) of the applicant's DA Form 20 does not show award of either the CIB or the CAR.  A review of the applicant's official records fails to show that he was ever awarded or recommended for award of the CIB or the CAR.

6.  Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant's DD Form 214 does not show award of either the CIB or the CAR.

7.  Review of the Awards and Decorations Computer-Assisted Retrieval System (ADCARS), an index of general orders issued during the Vietnam era between 

1965 and 1973 maintained by the Military Awards Branch of the U.S. Army Human Resources Command, failed to reveal any orders for the CIB or the CAR pertaining to the applicant.

8.  U.S. Army Vietnam Regulation Number 672-1 (Awards and Decorations) specifically governed award of the Combat Infantryman Badge to Army forces operating in South Vietnam.  This regulation specifically stated that criteria for award of the Combat Infantryman Badge identified the man who trained, lived, and fought as an infantryman and the Combat Infantryman Badge is the unique award established to recognize the infantryman and only the infantryman for his service.  Further, “the Combat Infantryman Badge is not an award for being shot at or for undergoing the hazards of day to day combat.”  This regulation also stated the Combat Infantryman Badge was authorized for award to infantry officers and to enlisted and warrant officer persons who have an infantry MOS and required that they must have served in active ground combat while assigned or attached to an infantry unit of brigade, regimental or smaller size.  The regulation stated that the Combat Infantryman Badge was awarded only to enlisted individuals who held and served in MOS 11B, 11C, 11F, 11G, or 11H.

9.  Department of Defense Instruction 1348.33 (Military Awards Program) shows that the CAR was authorized by the Secretary of the Navy on 17 February 1969. It is awarded to members of the U.S. Navy, U.S. Marine Corps, and the U.S. Coast Guard operating under the control of the U.S. Navy in the grade of 
O-6 and below who have actively participated in ground or surface combat.  The Department of Defense Instruction lists the actions for which the CAR is authorized beginning with Southeast Asia on 1 March 1961 and ending with Operation Desert Storm in 1991.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that his record should be corrected to show that he was awarded either the CIB or the CAR for his service in the Republic of Vietnam was carefully considered.

2.  The applicant's OMPF is void of any orders or other documents indicating that he was ever recommended for or awarded the CIB or CAR by proper authority while serving on active duty.  Additionally, a review of the ADCARS database failed to reveal any orders for the CIB or the CAR pertaining to the applicant.


3.  By regulation, in order to support award of the CIB, there must not only be evidence that a member served in an infantry MOS in an infantry unit, but also that he was personally present and participated with the qualifying infantry unit while it was engaged in active ground combat with enemy forces.

4.  Although the evidence of record shows the applicant served in an infantry MOS in an infantry unit during the period 18 July through 27 October 1967, his record is devoid of any evidence and he has failed to provide any evidence that he was personally present and participated with the qualifying infantry unit while it was engaged in active ground combat with enemy forces.  Accordingly, he is not entitled to award of the CIB.

5.  The CAR is awarded to members of the U.S. Navy, U.S. Marine Corps, and the U.S. Coast Guard operating under the control of the U.S. Navy in the grade of O-6 and below who have actively participated in ground or surface combat.  The applicant's record is devoid of any evidence and he has failed to provide any evidence that he fulfilled this requirement.  Accordingly, he is not entitled to award of the CAR.

6.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant did not submit any evidence that would satisfy this requirement.  Therefore, there is no basis for granting the applicant's requested relief.

7.  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

____X___  ____X___  ___X___  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.



      __________X_____________
               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)                                         AR20090014635



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090014635



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1