IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	   13 August 2013 

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130009882 


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 for award of the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB). 

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he met the requirements of Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Awards) in effect at the time for award of the CIB because his duty military occupational specialty (MOS) was that of an infantryman and he served with an infantry unit.  He also states that while his MOS was that of an 11E (Armor Crewman) he served in the same unit and performed in combat just as the infantryman did and he should be entitled to award of the CIB. 

3.  The applicant defers to counsel to provide additional evidence with his application.

COUNSEL'S REQUEST, STATEMENT AND EVIDENCE:

1.  Counsel requests reconsideration of the applicant’s prior request for award of the CIB.  

2.  Counsel states, in effect, that he was the applicant’s platoon leader in Vietnam and he can attest to the fact that the applicant performed as an infantryman in his platoon and should have been awarded the CIB for his actions in Vietnam.  He also states the applicant met the requirements for award of the CIB in accordance Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time.  He goes on to state that even if the applicant did not meet the strict requirements of the applicable regulation, he met the intent of the regulation by his performance and he should be awarded the CIB as others who were awarded the CIB and did not possess an infantry MOS. 

3.  Counsel provides a memorandum in support with a list of 12 exhibits which include copies of the applicant’s records. 

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 AC93-13824, on 
3 April 1996 and AR2002081300, on 13 March 2003.

2.  The applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States on 7 April 1970.  He completed the training requirements and he was awarded MOS 11E1O (Armor Crewman) before being transferred to Vietnam on 3 September 1970.

3.  He was initially assigned to Headquarters and Headquarters Troop (HHT), 1st Squadron, 9th Cavalry Regiment, 1st Cavalry Division with duty as an armor crewman and 10 days later he was transferred to B Troop of the same squadron with duty in MOS 11E.  He was promoted to pay grade E-5 on 1 March 1971 and on 11 April 1971 he was transferred back to HHT with duty in MOS 11E. 

4.  On 8 June 1971, he departed Vietnam and he was transferred to Fort Hood, TX where he was assigned to an armor company in MOS 11E with duty as a tank driver.

5.  He remained at Fort Hood until he was honorably released from active duty on 6 December 1971.  He completed 1 year and 8 months of active service and the DD Form 214 he was issued shows that he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, Vietnam Service Medal with one bronze service star, Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal, and his marksmanship badges.

6.  On 29 September 1992, the applicant applied to this Board for award of the CIB and other awards.  In Board Docket Number AC93-13824, dated 3 April 1996, his request for award of the CIB was denied; but he was awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal and this award and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation were added to his DD Form 214.  During the processing of that case the Board obtained a staff advisory opinion from the Awards Branch, Total Army Personnel Command (now known as the Human Resources Command) which opined that the applicant was not eligible for award of the CIB because he did not possess an infantry MOS.  The Board agreed that there was no evidence that the applicant possessed an infantry MOS.

7.  The applicant again applied for reconsideration of his request for award of the CIB and on 13 March 2003 the Board denied his request in Docket Number AR2002081300 based on the lack of evidence showing that he was eligible for award of the CIB.

8.  A review of the applicant’s official records failed to show any evidence of the applicant ever being awarded the MOS of an infantryman.

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states 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.  Additionally, Appendix V of U.S. Army Vietnam Regulation 672-1 states that during the Vietnam era the CIB was awarded only to enlisted individuals who held and served in MOS 11B, 11C, 11D, 11F, 11G, or 11H.

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 also 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 CIB or the Combat Medical Badge.  Award of the Combat Action Badge is authorized from 18 September 2001 to a date to be determined.  Award for qualifying service in any previous conflict is not authorized.  Retroactive awards of the Combat Action Badge are not authorized prior to 18 September 2001.  The Combat Action Badge was established on 2 May 2005. 

11.  Army Regulation 672-5-1 in effect at the time (applicant’s enclosure #10), provides, in pertinent part, that an individual must possess an infantry MOS and satisfactorily perform duties in an infantry unit during any period the unit was engaged in active ground combat. 



DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  All Soldiers are provided basic combat skills training after they enter the Army.  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 award of the CIB.

2.  Given the statements provided by counsel who was the applicant’s platoon leader at the time, there is no doubt that the applicant performed the duties of an infantryman in Vietnam.   

3.  Unfortunately, the applicant never possessed an infantry MOS or any other MOS that qualifies for award of the CIB.  Accordingly, he was not entitled to award of the CIB as were others in similar circumstances who were involved in combat and did not possess an infantry MOS.

4.  Counsel’s assertion that the regulation in effect at the time allowed the applicant to be awarded the CIB has been noted and found to lack merit.  The regulations regarding award of the CIB has changed very little over the years and it has never authorized award of the CIB to Soldiers possessing MOS 11E.  Additionally, the regulation has always required a Soldier to possess an infantry MOS, not just to serve in the duty MOS of an infantryman as every Soldier is trained to do.  A duty MOS has never been the standard used to award the CIB. 

5.  It is noted that the Army eventually recognized the need for a badge similar to the CIB and this resulted in the creation of the Combat Action Badge in 2005, which covers circumstances such as the applicant’s.  Unfortunately, that badge is not awarded retroactively to the Vietnam War.  Accordingly, there appears to be no basis to grant the applicant’s 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 AC93-13824, dated 3 April 1996 and Docket Number AR2002081300, dated 13 March 2003.

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 Vietnam War.  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)                                         AR20130009882



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130009882



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1