IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 8 October 2014 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140002791 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests correction of his records to show award of the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB). 2. The applicant states he served in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) during 1968 and 1969 with the 5th Special Forces Group, B-20 Mobile Strike Force. a. He was medically evacuated in 1969; however, prior to his departure he was told he was recommended for the CIB. Several months after his discharge from the Army he received his award of the Bronze Star Medal, but he never received the CIB. b. At one of his unit's reunions, the officer who recommended him for the CIB asked if he had received the badge. He told him "No" and the officer responded that "somebody had screwed up." However, the officer provided him with his account of one of several incidents that would qualify the applicant for the CIB. 3. The applicant provides copies of an email message and a note. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. 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 also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing. 2. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 10 January 1967. He was honorably discharged on 12 December 1967 to accept a commission as an officer in the U.S. Army after completing 11 months and 3 days of net active service this period. He was awarded the National Defense Service Medal and Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-14). 3. The applicant was appointed as a Reserve commissioned officer of the Army, in the rank of second lieutenant, on 13 December 1967 and entered active duty. He was branch detailed to the infantry and awarded specialty 1542 (Infantry Unit Commander). He was subsequently awarded specialty 31542 (Special Forces Officer). 4. His DA Form 66 (Officer Qualification Record) shows in: a. item 17 (Foreign Service): service in Vietnam from 8 December 1968 through 16 January 1970; b. item 18 (Record of Assignments) that he served in – * specialty 36201, Funds Officer, B-20 (Counterinsurgency), Company B, 5th Special Forces Group (Airborne), 1st Special Forces, from 11 December 1968 through 16 November 1969 * specialty 0003, Patient, Medical Hold Company, 106th General Hospital, Japan, from 17 November 1969 through 16 January 1970 c. item 21 (Awards and Decorations) does not show the CIB. 5. A DA Form 67-6 (U.S. Army Officer Evaluation Report) covering the period 11 December 1968 through 15 September 1969, shows the applicant was assigned to Detachment B-20, Company B, 5th Special Forces Group (Airborne), 1st Special Forces. It also shows he served as Funds Officer for a Special Forces "B" detachment in a Mobile Strike Force Command. A review of the document failed to show he performed infantry duties. 6. General Orders Number 1939, issued by Headquarters, 5th Special Forces Group (Airborne), 1st Special Forces, on 29 November 1969, awarded him the Bronze Star Medal for meritorious service in the RVN from 10 December 1968 to 7 December 1969. 7. A review of his military personnel records failed to reveal any evidence that he was recommended for, authorized, or awarded the CIB. 8. In support of his application he provides the following documents: a. an email message thread consisting of messages – (1) from the applicant to Mr. Dale E. M----, dated 17 November 2009, that shows he and Mr. Peter H------- recently "spent a lot of time reminiscing and recounted the time when the compound was being heavily rocketed" and "several rockets landed within the compound that evening," and (2) to the applicant from Mr. Dale E. M----, dated 17 December 2009, that shows, in pertinent part, he believes the rocket attack took place on 17 March 1969. b. a note to the applicant from Mr. David E. M----, dated 23 January 2014, that shows "You most definitely (author's emphasis) deserve the CIB. That night a 122 went into one of our Yards barracks, but was a dud." 9. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning military awards and decorations. a. Paragraph 8-6 contains the regulatory guidance for the CIB. It states there are basically three requirements for award of the CIB. The Soldier must be an infantryman satisfactorily performing infantry duties; he must be assigned or attached to an infantry unit of brigade, regimental, or smaller size during such time as the unit is engaged in active ground combat; and he must actively participate in such ground combat. b. During the Vietnam Conflict, announcement of award of the CIB was made in unit special orders. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant contends his records should be corrected to show he was awarded the CIB because he served with the B-20 Mobile Strike Force, 5th Special Forces Group (Airborne) in the RVN; he was involved in several incidents that qualify him for the CIB; and he was recommended for the CIB. 2. The applicant's request for award of the CIB was carefully considered. a. Records show he served as a funds officer for a Special Forces "B" detachment in a Mobile Strike Force Command while assigned to Company B, 5th Special Forces Group (Airborne), 1st Special Forces, from 11 December 1968 through 16 November 1969. b. The email messages and note the applicant provides in support of his request, which were produced more than 40 years after the period of service under review, provide insufficient evidence to satisfy the strict criteria to establish entitlement to the CIB. Specifically, that he was personally under hostile fire while assigned to a position and unit designated as qualifying for award of the CIB. c. In addition, there are no orders or other evidence in his military service records that show he was awarded the CIB. d. Therefore, in view of the foregoing, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support his claim to the CIB. 3. The Board wants the applicant and all others concerned to know that this action in no way diminishes the sacrifices made by the applicant in service to our Nation during the Vietnam Conflict. The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of his service in arms. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____X___ ____X___ ___X___ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. _______ _ X______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140002791 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140002791 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1