PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:            7 October 1998                                    
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-10843

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

	Mr. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mrs. Nancy Amos .		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

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

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

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

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 to show his specialty as 31B20 Field Communications Specialist and to add the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB), the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM) and the expert rifleman badge.

3.  The applicant states he was trained as a 31B.  He was sometimes utilized as a 71H, Personnel Specialist, but his primary military occupational specialty (MOS) was 31B.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 12 July 1962.  He completed basic training and advanced individual training and was awarded MOS 310.00 (later converted to 31B), Field Communications Crewman.  

5.  On 14 June 1965, when the applicant was reassigned from Headquarters and Headquarters Company to Company A, 2d Battalion, 10th Infantry, Fort Carson, CO, his conduct was rated as “unsatisfactory” and his efficiency as “good.”

6.  He arrived in Vietnam on 20 October 1965.  His DA Form 20, Personnel Qualification Record shows he was assigned to Company A, 1st Battalion, 26th Infantry and worked as a Radio Mechanic.

7.  He has two sets of CIB orders on file.  Special Orders 309 dated                   16 December 1965 shows his MOS as 11B.  Special Orders 154 dated 3 June 1966 shows his MOS as 31B.  He departed Vietnam on 19 October 1966.

8.  On 3 February 1967, the applicant was convicted by a special court-martial of being absent without leave (AWOL).  He was sentenced to confinement at hard labor for 1 month.  He was released from confinement on 4 March 1967.

9.  The applicant’s DA Form 20 shows MOS 31B deleted and MOS 71H awarded on 20 June 1967.  No MOS orders are available. 

10.  The applicant  was AWOL from 17 August - 20 October 1967.

11.  Apparently, a bar to reenlistment was placed on the applicant as an entry on his DA Form 20 shows he was not eligible for reenlistment (RE-4).

12.  On 28 May 1968, the applicant was honorably discharged due to a physical disability incurred in line of duty.  He had completed 5 years, 4 months and       17 days of creditable active service and had 151 days of lost time.

13.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides for the award of the Combat Infantryman Badge to a soldier who is an infantryman satisfactorily performing infantry duties, who is assigned to an infantry unit during such time as the unit is engaged in active ground combat, and must actively participate in such ground combat.  Campaign or battle credit alone is not sufficient for award of the CIB.

14.  That regulation also provides for the award of the AGCM for each 3 years of qualifying service completed on or after 27 August 1940 or, for first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June 1950 of less than 1 year when final separation was by reason of physical disability incurred in line of duty.  Qualifying service means that the soldier’s character has been evaluated as above reproach and that his record of service indicates that he has willingly complied with the demands of the military environment.  During the time in question, this meant that the soldier’s conduct and efficiency were rated as “excellent” for the entire period.  In addition, conviction by courts-martial terminates a period of qualifying service; a new period begins the following day after completion of the sentence imposed by the court-martial.  An individual whose retention is not warranted or for whom a bar to reenlistment has been approved are not eligible for award of the AGCM.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  This Board does not dispute the fact the applicant was trained as a 31B and that he held and worked as a 31B for the major part of his military service.  However, the evidence of record shows the MOS the applicant held at the time of his discharge was 71H, Personnel Specialist.  Block 23 of the DD Form 214 was meant to indicate the MOS the soldier held at the time of his separation.

2.  Two sets of orders indicate the applicant was awarded the CIB.  The first order shows his MOS as 11B; however, there is no evidence in the records to show he ever held MOS 11B or worked as an 11B.  The second order shows his MOS as 31B, which MOS he did hold at the time.  However, the regulatory guidance is very clear that the CIB will only be awarded to an infantryman performing infantry duties while engaged in actual combat.  This Board does not question that the applicant was in a hostile fire zone; he was awarded the Purple Heart for shrapnel wounds that caused his medical evacuation from Vietnam.  However, this Board believes he was erroneously awarded the CIB as the evidence of record shows he was not an infantryman and did not perform infantry duties.

3.  The applicant did not meet the qualification for award of the Army Good Conduct Medal.  He would normally have been due his first AGCM on 11 July 1965 upon completion of 3 years of qualifying service; however, his qualifying period was interrupted on 14 June 1965 when his conduct and efficiency were rated as less than excellent.  His court-martial and the determination that he was ineligible for reenlistment further disqualified him from that award.

4.  The applicant was awarded the expert rifleman badge for the M-14.

5.  In view of the foregoing, it would be proper to correct the applicant’s records as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That the DD Form 214 of the applicant be corrected by adding the expert qualification badge w/rifle bar. 

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied 

BOARD VOTE:  

________  ________  ________  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON