RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            27 JANUARY 2004                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003090818

	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. Kenneth H. Aucock		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		Chairperson	
	Mr. Lester Echols		Member	
	Ms. Yolanda Maldonado		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).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:  

1.  The applicant requests award of the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB).

2.  The applicant states that he was involved in action with Viet Cong infiltrators on or about 1 April 1972.  An error occurred because Command Communications Center (CCC) Company did not recommend him for the CIB despite the fact that he was armed and patrolling the CCC Company area when Viet Cong infiltrators attacked with grenades and wounded personnel.  

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or Discharge), a copy of pages from his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record), a copy of a 15 May 1972 Operational Report of the 39th Signal Battalion, with a 22 August 1972 endorsement from Headquarters, United States Army Vietnam/MACV SUPCOM, and a copy of battalion [39th Signal] organizational chart.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an error which occurred on 8 June 1973.  The application submitted in this case is dated 24 April 2003.  

2.  Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file within the 3-year statute of limitation if the ABCMR determines that it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  The applicant enlisted in the Army for three years on 9 June 1970, completed training as a data communications terminal specialist, MOS (Military Occupational Specialty) 72F20, and in February 1971 was assigned to a support company in Asmara, Ethiopia.  In November 1971 he was assigned to the Command Communications Center Company, 39th Signal Battalion, in Vietnam, initially as a security guard, MOS 11B20 (infantryman), and then in January 1972 in his primary MOS of 72F20 as a data communications terminal specialist.   

4.  The applicant was promoted to sergeant on 1 June 1972.  He was awarded the Army Commendation Medal for meritorious service for the period November 1971 to July 1972.  He returned to the United States in August 1972.  The applicant participated in three campaigns during his tour in Vietnam, and the Command Communications Center Company was awarded the Meritorious Unit Commendation and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm for its actions during the period the applicant was assigned to that unit.
5.  The applicant was assigned to Fort Hood, Texas upon his return to the United States.  He was awarded the Army Commendation Medal for meritorious service for the period 10 October 1972 to 8 June 1973.    

6.  On 8 June 1973 the applicant was released from active duty.  His                DD Form 214 does not reflect the above-mentioned awards, nor does it show award of the Combat Infantryman Badge.  That form shows his specialty as 72F40.  The applicant's DA Form 20 shows that his duty MOS from 29 November 1971 to 10 January 1972 was 11B20, and that his principal duty during that period was as a security guard.  His military occupational specialty on that form shows that he was awarded a 72F MOS.  It does not show award of MOS 11B.

7.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides for award of the Combat Infantryman Badge to infantry officers and to enlisted and warrant officer persons who have an infantry MOS.  There are basically three requirements for award of the CIB.  The soldier must be an infantryman satisfactorily performing infantry duties, must be assigned to an infantry unit of brigade, regimental, or smaller size, 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.  Although the exigencies of combat may require non-infantry soldiers to temporarily perform the basic infantry duties that all soldiers are taught, it is not a basis for the award of the Combat Infantryman Badge.
 
8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides that the Good Conduct Medal is awarded to individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency and fidelity during a qualifying period of active duty enlisted service.  This period is 3 years except in those cases when the period for the first award ends with the termination of a period of Federal military service.    
 
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant served as a security guard with the duty MOS of 11B20 for approximately 6 weeks in Vietnam.  Although he might have been involved in action as he states, he was not awarded that infantry MOS, nor was he assigned to an infantry unit engaged in combat.  He is not entitled to award of the CIB.  

2.  The applicant served his country faithfully and honorably.  He is entitled to award of the Army Good Conduct Medal. 

3.  The applicant was awarded the Army Commendation Medal for meritorious service on two occasions.  Those awards should be shown on his DD Form 214.  
4.  The applicant participated in three campaigns while in Vietnam.  His            DD Form 214 should reflect award of the Vietnam Service Medal with three bronze service stars (one for each campaign).  He is also entitled to award of the Meritorious Unit Commendation and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm.

BOARD VOTE:

__AAO   _  ___LE __  ___YM __  GRANT RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief and to excuse failure to timely file.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal, two awards of the Army Commendation Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal with three bronze service stars, the Meritorious Unit Commendation, and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm.

2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to award of the Combat Infantryman Badge.  

		____Arthur A. Omartian______
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003090818	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20040127	
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.