MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:           7 October 1998                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-06785

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Ms. Wanda L. Waller		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler		Chairperson	
	Mr. James E. Vick		Member	
	Mr. Luther L. Santiful		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  Award of the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB).  

APPLICANT STATES:  That, in effect, he never received orders for the CIB.  He contends he earned the CIB for his service in Vietnam from 1969 until 1970 and the proper paper work was submitted to battalion headquarters.   

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted in April 1948 and completed over 20 years of active federal service.  He was retired as a sergeant first class on 31 August 1970. 

The applicant’s DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States), which he authenticated in his own hand at the time of his separation from the Army, does not show the CIB as an authorized award.  Item 23a (Specialty Number & Title) of the DD Form 214 shows “12Z50 CMBT ENGR SR SGT” [Combat Engineer Senior Sergeant].

The applicant’s personnel records show he was assigned to an engineer company in military occupational specialty (MOS) 12C (bridge sergeant) and MOS 12Z (combat engineer senior sergeant) during his first tour in Vietnam
(2 March 1967 to 3 March 1968).  Records show he was assigned to a combat engineer company in MOS 12Z during his second tour in Vietnam (3 January 1969 to 2 January 1970).  

Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that the Combat Infantryman Badge 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 Total Army Personnel Command has advised, in similar cases, that during the Vietnam era the Combat Infantryman Badge was awarded only to enlisted individuals who held and served in MOS 11B, 11C, 11F, 11G, or 11H.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  Evidence of record shows the applicant served in MOS 12C (bridge sergeant) and MOS 12Z (combat engineer senior sergeant) during his assignments in Vietnam.

2.  There is no evidence that the applicant was ever awarded an infantry MOS; served in an infantry MOS, or served in active ground combat while an assigned member of an infantry company in Vietnam.  Therefore, he is not entitled to award of the CIB.

3.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

_SAC____  JEV_____  LLS_____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director