PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:      

	BOARD DATE:           10 October 2002                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002073052

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Walter Avery, Jr.		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond J. Wagner		Chairperson	
	Mr. Roger W. Able		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		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 records to show award of the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB).

3.  The applicant states that his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) does not list the CIB among his awards.  He contends that he served as a “rifleman/grunt” in Vietnam.

4.  Counsel is listed but no statement is provided.

5.  The applicant’s military records show that he entered the Regular Army on 2 March 1966.  The applicant’s DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows that he completed training as an Armor Intelligence Specialist in military occupational specialty (MOS) 11D and served in Vietnam in his MOS from 21 October 1967 through 20 October 1968, while assigned to Troop G, 2nd Squadron, 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment.  He achieved the rank of sergeant and was transferred to the US Army Reserve on 17 October 1968, upon completion of his active duty service.  His character of service was honorable.  He had completed a total of 2 years, 7 months and 16 days of active service.  His separation documents show no lost time.

6.  The applicant’s DD Form 214, does not show the CIB as an authorized award in item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized).  His DD Form 214 shows in item 23a (Specialty Number and Title) the entry, “11D40 Scout.”

7.  His awards include the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal, the Vietnam Campaign Medal, and the Purple Heart.  The CIB is not listed as an authorized award. 

8.  A DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty), issued on 16 November 2001, reflects that he was awarded the Bronze Star Medal with First Oak Leaf Cluster and "V" Device and the Presidential Unit Emblem.

9.  Awards reflected on his DA Form 20, but not on his DD Form 214 are the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Pistol Bar and the Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar.

10.  There is no evidence in the applicant’s records that he was awarded an infantry MOS in Vietnam or that he served in an infantry duty position in an infantry unit of regimental or smaller size during his assignment in Vietnam.

11.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that 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.  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.

12.  The same regulation provides that the Bronze Service Star is based on qualifying service, for each campaign listed in Appendix B of this regulation and states that authorized Bronze Service Stars will be worn on the appropriate service medal.  In the applicant’s case, he is entitled to two Bronze Service Stars for participating in the Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase III and the Tet 69 Counteroffensive, 1969, Campaigns.

13.  The same regulation provides, in pertinent part, that the Army Good Conduct Medal is awarded on a selective basis to soldiers who distinguish themselves from among their fellow soldiers by their exemplary conduct, efficiency and fidelity throughout a specified period of continuous enlisted active Federal military service: for first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June 1950 of less than 3 years, but more than 1 year.

14.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 lists the unit awards received by units serving in Vietnam.  This document shows that at the time of the applicant’s assignment his unit was cited for the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal-First Class Unit Citation for the period 19 December 1966 through 28 June 1969, by Department of the Army General Order 59, dated 1969.

15.  The same regulation provides that based on Department of the Army General Order Number 8, dated 19 March 1974, all units assigned to Vietnam between 8 February 1962 and 28 March 1973, were awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Evidence of record shows the applicant served in an armored cavalry unit while he was assigned in Vietnam, not an infantry unit, and served in MOS 11D  a MOS not recognized for award of the CIB.  Therefore, there is no basis for awarding him the CIB.

2.  Nonetheless, in reviewing his case it was noted that he is entitled to two Bronze Service Stars to be worn on his Vietnam Service Medal, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal-First Class Unit Citation, the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Pistol Bar, and the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar.  Further, he is entitled to a correction of his records to show these awards.
3.  Similarly, the applicant’s service was meritorious, as evidenced by his promotion to sergeant, and award of the Bronze Star Medal with Oak Leaf Cluster for meritorious service.  Likewise, the record is devoid of any evidence of disciplinary action taken against him.  As such, it would appear that the absence of the Good Conduct Medal for the period of his service from 2 March 1966 through 17 October 1968 was in error and he is entitled to the award and to have it shown on his separation document.

4.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal, two Bronze Service Stars to be worn on his Vietnam Service Medal, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal-First Class Unit Citation, the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Pistol Bar, and the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar.

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

BOARD VOTE:  

___jtm___  ____rwa_  ___jtm__  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		_________Raymond J. Wagner____
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002073052	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20021010	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.