MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:           24 April 2003      
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002078075

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. W. W. Osborn, Jr.		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Ms. Terry L. Placek		Member	
	Mr. Robert L. Duecaster		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:  Reconsideration of his earlier appeal to correct his military records by awarding him the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB). 

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that an examination of the table of organization of his unit, Security Platoon, Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 3rd Ordnance Battalion, would reveal that it was an infantry unit of platoon size.  The Security Platoon was equipped with infantry weapons and performed only infantry type duties.  He performed only infantry duties in Vietnam and did not serve in an artillery military occupational specialty (MOS) at all.  He contends that the ABCMR did not adequately research his original request. 

NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION:  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum prepared to reflect the Board's previous consideration of the case (AR2002068509) on 4 June 2002.

The applicant’s contentions are new argument that requires Board consideration.

Army Regulation 600-8-22 prescribes Army policy and procedures concerning awards.  Paragraph 8-6 provides for award of the CIB.  That paragraph states that there are basically three requirements for award of the CIB.  The soldier must be an infantryman satisfactorily performing infantry duties, he must be assigned to an infantry unit during such time as the unit is engaged in active ground combat, and he must actively participate in such ground combat.  Specific requirements state, in effect, that an Army enlisted soldier must be have an infantry or special forces specialty, satisfactorily performed duty while assigned or attached as a member of an infantry, ranger or special forces unit of brigade, regimental, or smaller size during any period such unit was engaged in active ground combat.  Eligibility for special forces personnel (less the special forces medical sergeant) accrues from 20 December 1989.  

Army Regulation 15-185 sets forth the policy and procedures for the ABCMR.  It provides that, if a request for a reconsideration is received within one year of the prior consideration and the case has not been previously reconsidered, it will be resubmitted to the Board if there is evidence (including but not limited to any facts or arguments as to why relief should be granted) that was not in the record at the time of the Board’s prior consideration.  The staff of the Board is authorized to determine whether or not such evidence has been submitted.

The regulation provides further guidance for reconsideration requests that are received more than 1 year after the Board’s original consideration or after the Board has already reconsidered the case.  In such cases, the staff of the Board will review the request to determine if substantial relevant evidence has been submitted that shows fraud, mistake in law, mathematical miscalculation, 

manifest error, or if there exists substantial relevant new evidence discovered contemporaneously with or within a short time after the Board’s original decision.  If the staff finds such evidence, the case will be resubmitted to the Board.  If no such evidence is found, the application will be returned without action.

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.  The governing regulation provides that award of the CIB must be predicated upon both having an infantry MOS and membership in an infantry unit during active ground combat.  Several security units in Vietnam were trained in and employed infantry tactics.  Some were even called infantry companies, but they were not organic infantry units and their personnel were not eligible for award of the CIB. 
 
2.  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 this requirement.  

3.  The overall merits of the case, including the latest submissions and arguments are insufficient as a basis for the Board to reverse its previous decision.

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

__RVO__  __TLP __  ___RLD__  DENY APPLICATION

	Carl W. S. Chun
    Director, Army Board for Correction 
	of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002078075	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020424	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	 	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION		
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.