PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           12 April 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999033054

	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.  

	Mrs. Joyce A. Hughes		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Robert G. Hinkle		Chairperson	
	Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		Member	
	Mr. James P. Stueve		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 award of the Combat Infantry Badge (CIB) and that his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) be corrected to show the award.

3.  The applicant states in effect that, he does not understand why his military occupational specialty (MOS) as Radio Operator would not qualify him for the CIB.  He further states as a Radio Operator he moved with his unit, fought with his unit and was responsible for communication for his unit.  His MOS made him responsible for the moves of everyone in his unit and that alone should in no way disqualify him for the badge.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he was inducted into the Army on
27 February 1967.  He completed Basic Training and Advanced Individual Training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 05B20 (Radio Operator).

5.  The applicant served with Company E, 3rd Battalion, 47th Infantry, 9th Infantry Division, Vietnam from 18 April 1968 to 8 June 1968.  On 22 October 1968, the applicant was permanently retired by reason of a Physical Disability.  His DD Form 214 shows he was awarded: the Purple Heart; the Republic of Vietnam Medal w/Device 1960; the Vietnam Service Medal; the National Defense Service Medal; the Sharpshooter Badge (M-14 Rifle) and the Sharpshooter Badge (M-16 Rifle).

6.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 prescribes Army policy and criteria concerning individual military awards.  In pertinent part, it states that the CIB was established during World War II to provide special recognition of the unique role of the Army Infantryman, the only soldier whose daily mission is to close with and destroy the enemy and to seize and hold terrain.  The badge was intended as an inducement for individuals to join the infantry while serving as a morale booster for infantrymen.  In developing the CIB, the War Department did not dismiss or ignore the contributions of other branches.  Their vital contributions to the overall war effort were noted, but it was decided that other awards and decorations are sufficient to recognize their contributions.  From the beginning, Army leadership have taken care to retain the badge for the unique purpose for which it was established.  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 during such time as the unit is engaged in active ground combat, and must actively participate in such ground combat.

7.  It also provides for the award of the Good Conduct Medal is awarded for each 
3 years of continuous enlisted active Federal Military service completed on or after 
27 August 1940 and, for the first award only, upon termination of service on or after 
27 June 1950 of less than 3 years but more than 1 year.  At the time, a soldier’s conduct and efficiency rating must have been rated as “excellent” for the entire period of qualifying service.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Although the applicant was serving in an infantry unit and during such time his unit was engaged in active ground combat, he did not have a MOS as an infantryman, therefore disqualifying him for CIB award.  Many individuals are probably not aware of the strict requirements for award of the CIB.

2.  The Board does not denigrate the valuable sacrifice and services of the applicant while assigned to Vietnam.

3.  The records available to the Board indicated that the applicant met the regulatory requirements and was eligible to receive the Army Good Conduct Medal (GCM) for the period of 27 February 1967 to 22 October 1968.

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:

     a.  awarding the Good Conduct Medal to the individual concerned; and

     b.  by correcting item 24 of his DD Form 214 to show that he was awarded the Good Conduct Medal for the period 27 February 1967 to 22 October 1968.

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

BOARD VOTE:  

__rgh___  __bje___  __jps___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

			Robert G. Hinkle
		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999033054	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000412	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107.0111	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.