CIB's being awarded to com engs

[Walt's Daughter]

I believe we are well on our way to solving and proving our case boys. We have to keep picking up key information along the way and add it to our repetoire. Have highlighted KEY portions that proscribe to OUR FIGHT!

 

This excerpt was acquired from this document: Paragraph 2-6, Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) 25 February 1995

 

 

 

Specific eligibility requirements:

 

(1) A soldier must be an Army infantry or special forces Officer (SSI 11 or 18) in the grade of colonel or below, or an Army enlisted soldier or warrant officer with an infantry or special forces MOS, who subsequent to 6 December 1941 has 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. Retroactive awards for special forces personnel are not authorized.

 

(2) A recipient must be personally present and under hostile fire while serving in an assigned infantry or special forces primary duty, in a unit actively engaged in ground combat with the enemy. The unit in question can be of any size smaller than brigade. For example, personnel possessing an infantry MOS in a rifle squad of a cavalry platoon in a cavalry troop would be eligible for award of the CIB. Battle or campaign participation credit alone is not sufficient; the unit must have been in active ground combat with the enemy during the period.

 

(3) Personnel with other than an infantry or special forces MOS are not eligible, regardless of the circumstances. The infantry or special forces SSI or MOS does not necessarily have to be the soldier's primary specialty, as long as the soldier has been properly trained in infantry or special forces tactics, possesses the appropriate skill code, and is serving in that specialty when engaged in active ground combat as described above. Commanders are not authorized to make any exceptions to this policy.

 

(4) Awards will not be made to general officers nor to members of headquarters companies of units larger in size than brigade.

[Walt's Daughter]

Taken from [Federal Register: April 5, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 65)]

[Rules and Regulations]

[Page 17275-17334]

From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

[DOCID:fr05ap06-22]

 

 

 

 

(v) Service members from other U.S. Armed Forces and foreign

military (infantry and Special Forces equivalents) assigned or attached

as a member of a U.S. Army infantry or Special Forces unit of brigade,

regimental, or smaller size may be considered for award of the CIB. The

specific eligibility requirements listed in Sec. 578.69(a) must be

met. Retroactive awards under these criteria are not authorized for

service prior to September 18, 2001.

© The CIB is authorized for award for the following qualifying

periods:

(1) World War II (December 7, 1941 to September 3, 1945).

(2) The Korean War (June 27, 1950 to July 27, 1953).

(3) Republic of Vietnam Conflict (March 2, 1961 to March 28, 1973),

combined with qualifying service in Laos (April 19, 1961 to October 6,

1962).

(4) Dominican Republic (April 28, 1965 to September 1, 1966).

(5) Korea on the DMZ (January 4, 1969 to March 31, 1994).

(6) El Salvador (January 1, 1981 to February 1, 1992).

(7) Grenada (October 23 to November 21, 1983).

(8) Joint Security Area, Panmunjom, Korea (November 23, 1984).

(9) Panama (December 20, 1989 to January 31, 1990).

(10) Southwest Asia Conflict (January 17 to April 11, 1991).

(11) Somalia (June 5, 1992 to March 31, 1994).

(12) Afghanistan (Operation ENDURING FREEDOM, December 5, 2001 to a

date to be determined).

(13) Iraq (Operation IRAQI FREEDOM, March 19, 2003 to a date to be

determined).

(d) The special provisions authorized for the Vietnam Conflict,

Laos, and Korea on the DMZ are outlined in paragraphs (d)(1) through

(5) of this section.

(1) During the Vietnam Conflict, any officer whose branch is other

than infantry who, under appropriate orders, has commanded a line

infantry (other

 

[[Page 17316]]

 

than a headquarters unit) unit of brigade, regimental, or smaller size

for at least 30 consecutive days is deemed to have been detailed in

infantry and is eligible for award of the CIB notwithstanding absence

of a written directive detailing that Soldier in the infantry, provided

all other requirements for the award have been met. Orders directing

the officer to assume command will be confirmed in writing at the

earliest practicable date.

[Walt's Daughter]

For further reading on ALL Military Awards... Dated December 11, 2006

 

http://www.calguard.ca.gov/casmr/pdf/AR600_8_22.pdf

[Walt's Daughter]

32 CFR Part 578

 

Decorations, Medals, Ribbons, and Similar Devices; Proposed Rule

 

[[Page 45114]]

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

 

Department of the Army

 

32 CFR Part 578

 

RIN 0702-AA41-U

 

 

 

 

Sec. 578.67 Combat Infantryman Badge.

 

(a) Specific eligibility requirements. (1) A soldier must be an

Army infantry or special forces officer (SSI 11 or 18) in the grade of

colonel or below, or an Army enlisted soldier or warrant officer with

an infantry or special forces MOS, who subsequent to December 6, 1941

has 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 December 20, 1989 and

is not retroactive.

[j3rdinf]

Roque: Lets hear from you.

[j3rdinf]

Roque: Your first take on this was: " 3-7-1 Recon and my combat buddy j3rdinf, I will add my two cents worth.

You both are absolutely RIGHT. I think the C.I.B. has lost a lot of its

meaning. I got mine in '43 and after over 600 days combat with other medals

I cherish my C.I.B. as my most prized possesion. How about you Joe and

371 Recon? Of course we are from another era. Guys keep 'em straight.

This 83 yr. old+ said it. Roque J. Riojas Adios Amigos!!!! " What happened????

 

This is starting to remind me of the "gun grabbers" on the 2nd ammendment rights fight. Changing rules from what it was originally designed to mean. To most, it really means one must be a full time Infantryman in combat, under fire and reurning small arms fire as a usual happening. It also meant recieving $ 10.00 per month (in WW 2) which would show in ones pay record if qualified. Granted, some other non-infantry outfits did see some combat as is expected. But their main job and MOS at the time was not a Infantry MOS.. Their job mainly was not "to take and hold ground" as was a combat infantrymans job day to day was, but to act as support and possibly occasionally fighting which is expected of most soldiers in wartime. Next it may be the Transportation outfits who were straffed by planes and shot back. Or with the Combat Medics Badge, those in rear hospitals who were shelled or bombed will want the CMB. Where does it end. Also, living conditions for combat infantrymen were usually quite different from other branches. Dont cheapen the CIB, leave it for just what it was awarded for. COMBAT INFANTRYMEN. WHO DID THIS AS A DAY TO DAY JOB. NOT A OCCASIONAL HAPPENING.. By the way, as most platoons and squads were usually short of replacements we had many openings that could be transferred into if one wished to be a infantryman and get a CIB the hard way. So go ahead and "flame" me. It is just the way I feel about it. I guess I am going to catch hell now.

[Walt's Daughter]

No one is here to FLAME anyone, so let's get that straight to all my SWEETHEARTS.

 

First off let me make something perfectly clear; no one is trying to CHANGE any rules. We are merely trying to reinforce the rules that were written during WWII, and applied to my guys then. We aren't trying to start something new. We are trying to reinforce a rule that already existed.

 

Second, many of my guys already WERE awarded the CIB. They include such men as my dad who was a 540th Engineer, and Captain John Fallon of the 36th Engineers, who has one too. They were awarded to them during wartime, not after! That is very important. Many other engineers who acted as infantry and fought in the front lines got them too. Many did not. That is where the fight lies.

 

Third, we aren't trying to get them for ALL ENGINEERS, but those engineers who did perform as infantry and fell under the EXISTING conditions required to get the CIB. So don't think we are trying to award them to the engineer who was typing up morning reports several miles behind the lines. That is not the case!

 

Fourth, as I stated a few posts back, I now have documents proving that those who were awarded the CIB's, did deserve them and it wasn't a fluke or accident. I have the document showing when and where they were awarded to a group of men in my dad's unit. It is an official 7th Army document from the National Archives.

 

Our point is simply this; those who fought alongside men like my dad and John, should have gotten them too. Those are the men we are fighting for, not just ANYONE. We are simply stating that there is an inconsistency, and THAT inconsistency must be rectified. There are engineers who fought on the frontlines alongside their buddies from the 3rd, 34th, 36th, and 45th Infantry regiments. Right next to those guys. Our engineer units were attached to them AS INFANTRY, and it even states it thusly in the reports from headquarters. These men were officially infantry as declared by the US Army. Many of the engineer units fought on the front lines as infantry in a continous battle for weeks and months at a time. Documented. That is our fight, that is our only fight. I have made that clear from day one.

 

Lastly, the documents that I found, in particular the Army Circular dated 1944, states that these men that I'm fighting for WERE qualified, so help me God before they pass on, I plan to give them the justice due to them.

[twobisquit]

Wow...I have to catch my breath before going on.

Marion...Those were words of passion.Keep writing like that and you will have a best seller.

Joe...the very last thing in the world I would want to do is see anything that would diminish the honor of that Badge. I am not the most eloquent of writers but this debate has been going on since 1944 as evidenced in the the following document-

 

Marion's note: Dec 2014

 

The document that Chris shared here is a letter from General Truscott to Commanding General, NATOUSA, APO US Army - July 30, 1944. From this document, you can see that even the general agreed with our arguments regarding engineers who were assigned and performed as infantry, including the 36th Engineers, who he specifically names in this document.

[Walt's Daughter]

What John and I are trying to find is this:

 

War Department Circular #186, dated 11 May 1944. This is the document that was the basis for the distribution and awarding of the CIB's to the men listed on my National Archives document dated 13 October 1944. I will look for that today. If I am unable to find it, I will contact NARA and request a copy through mail. An attainable goal, so do not fret. It is available.

[twobisquit]

Here's one more.