IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  21 February 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110017200 


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 reconsideration of his request to change his award of the Combat Action Badge (CAB) to the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB).

2.  The applicant defers his comments to counsel.

3.  The applicant provides:
* A copy of his Certificate of Completion for Marine Combat Training
* A letter from his platoon leader
* A statement explaining his application
* A copy of orders assigning him to an infantry company
* A copy of a Recommendation for Award of the Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) and his ARCOM Certificate
* A copy of his CAB orders
* A copy of Board proceedings number AR2002068627

COUNSEL'S REQUEST, STATEMENT AND EVIDENCE:

1.  Counsel requests reconsideration of the applicant’s request to be awarded the CIB instead of the CAB.

2.  Counsel states that the applicant’s case is unique in that he was trained in the infantry while in the Marine Corps.  He had a break in service and then enlisted in the Maine Army National Guard (MEARNG).  He goes on to state that the applicant was mobilized and his military occupational specialty (MOS) was listed as 11B (infantryman) and he was not asked to attend a secondary MOS school, presumably because he was already a school trained infantryman with training equal to or greater than that given to an Army infantryman.  He also states that the applicant’s pre-deployment training was all with the infantry and at no point did he serve as a plumber.  He continues by stating that the Board in similar cases (AR20060013090 and AR2002068627) decided in favor of the Soldier and awarded them the CIB and the Board must follow the precedent set in that case.  He concludes by stating that since the applicant served in an infantry MOS in a war zone and was school trained and qualified as an infantryman, there is no reason why he should not have been awarded the CIB.

3.  Counsel provides no additional documents other than those provided by the applicant.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20100030062, on 28 April 2011.

2.  The applicant enlisted in the Marine Corps on 25 September 1999.  He completed his training as an assault Amphibian Vehicle Crewman and was awarded the Marine Corps MOS of 1833 – Assault Amphibian Vehicle Crewman.  He was assigned to the 3d Assault Amphibian Battalion at Twentynine Palms, California.

3.  On 15 September 2000 he was discharged under honorable conditions due to misconduct- personality disorder.  He had served 11 months and 29 days of active service.

4. On 8 September 2007 he enlisted with a waiver in the MEARNG for duty as a plumber in an engineer unit.  He was awarded the MOS of a plumber on 25 September 2009. 

5.  On 10 January 2010, he was involuntarily reassigned to Company B, 3rd Battalion, 172 Infantry Regiment (Mountain), of the MEARNG, and mobilized for the purpose of deployment to Afghanistan in support of OEF.  His records show he served in Afghanistan from 2 March 2010 to 27 November 2010.  His reassignment order shows he was assigned to an MOS 11B position; however, it also shows he was not qualified for this position.  

6.  On 12 March 2010, he was promoted to sergeant (SGT)/E-5 and awarded MOS 21K2O, the skill level commensurate with his promotion to SGT.  This order does not award him a secondary MOS and it also contains an acknowledgment from the applicant that he understood that his promotion was contingent upon his serving in the MOS of 21K2O.

7.  Permanent Orders 290-003, Headquarters, 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault), dated 17 October 2010, awarded him the Combat Action Badge.

8.  The case provided by the applicant’s counsel (AR2002068627) which he contends sets a precedent by the Board involves the award of the CIB to a Soldier who served as an infantryman but held another MOS through on-the job training and because he had never been school trained in any MOS and had served the majority of his time in an infantry MOS, the Board awarded the Soldier the CIB.  The Board also changed the Soldier’s MOS to reflect that he held the MOS of an infantryman.

9.  Marine Corps Order 1200.17 provides a list of Marine Corps military occupational specialties.  It provides, in pertinent part, that the enlisted infantry career management field is career management field 03.  All enlisted infantry military occupational specialties (MOS) begin with the number 03, ie; 0300 – basic infantryman, 0311 – rifleman, etc.  The career management field (CMF) of 18 is the Tank and Assault Amphibious Vehicle CMF and all MOSs in that CMF begin with the numbers 18, ie, 1800 – Basic Tank and Assault Amphibious Vehicle Crewman.

10.  All Soldiers are provided basic combat skills training after they enter Military Service.  This is provided to ensure that all Soldiers have the survival skills to perform basic infantry missions when the need arises.  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 Combat Infantryman Badge.

11.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards), as amended by Military Personnel Message 08-190, states the Combat Infantryman Badge may be awarded to an infantryman satisfactorily performing infantry duties, assigned to an infantry unit during such time as the unit is engaged in active ground combat, and actively participating in such ground combat.  Specific requirements state, in effect, that an Army Soldier must have an infantry or special forces specialty/military occupational specialty and must have satisfactorily performed duty while assigned or attached as a member of an infantry, ranger, or special forces unit of brigade, regimental, or smaller size during any period such unit was engaged in active ground combat.  A Soldier must be personally present and under hostile fire while serving in an assigned infantry or special forces primary duty, in a unit actively engaged in ground combat with the enemy, to close with and destroy the enemy with direct fires.  

12.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states the requirements for award of the Combat Action Badge are branch and MOS immaterial.  Assignment to a combat arms unit or a unit organized to conduct close or offensive combat operations or performing offensive combat operations is not required to qualify for the Combat Action Badge.  However, it is not intended to award the Combat Action Badge to all Soldiers who serve in a combat zone or imminent danger area.  The Soldier must be performing assigned duties in an area where hostile fire pay or imminent danger pay is authorized.  The Soldier must be personally present and actively engaging or being engaged by the enemy and performing satisfactorily in accordance with the prescribed rules of engagement.  The Soldier must [not] be assigned or attached to a unit that would qualify the Soldier for the Combat Infantryman Badge or the Combat Medical Badge.  Award of the Combat Action Badge is authorized from 18 September 2001 to a date to be determined.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contention that he was an infantryman by virtue of his marine corps training and should have been awarded the CIB instead of the CAB has been noted and appears to lack merit.

2.  While there is no dispute that the applicant was assigned to an infantry unit and performed infantry duties, the applicant did not hold an infantry MOS either in the Marine Corps or in the MEARNG.

3.  The evidence of record clearly shows that he enlisted for and was awarded and promoted in the MOS of a plumber, which is why his chain of command appropriately awarded him the CAB.

4.  It is also noted that there are routinely personnel assigned to infantry units that do not possess infantry MOSs but are required to perform infantry duties when the need arises and given the training that all Soldiers receive when they enter the Service, they have a basic understanding of the duties required of them.  However, that does not mean that they are automatically classified as infantryman.

5.  Accordingly, there appears to be no basis to grant his request.



BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____X___  ___X____  ___X____  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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20100030062, dated 28 April 2011.

2.  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 the United States during the Global War on Terrorism.  The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of his service in arms.




      ___________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)                                         AR20110017200





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110017200



5


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1