APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his records be corrected to show entitlement to the award of the Bronze Star Medal with first oak leaf and the Air Medal.

APPLICANT STATES:  That his employment application was returned because of the discrepancy on his discharge papers.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

He was born on 27 January 1948.  On 3 January 1969, the applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States for 2 years.  He completed the required training and was awarded military occupational specialty 11B10 (Infantryman). 

The applicant was assigned to a unit in Vietnam from 3 June 1969 to 7 April 1970, he served in Company D, 18th Infantry Battalion and the 35th Infantry Battalion in Vietnam.  He served a total of 10 months in Vietnam.  The highest grade he achieved was pay grade E-5.

On 18 December 1970, the applicant was honorably discharged under Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 4, expiration term of service in pay grade E-5.  He served 1 year, 11 months and 16 days of honorable active service.  He was awarded the Army Commendation Medal (1st oak leaf cluster), the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal and the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal.  

On 22 March 1996, the applicant’s records in this case were reviewed in the Military Awards Branch at PERSCOM (COPY ATTACHED).  The consultant staff, determined that due to an apparent oversight, the Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device, the Army Commendation Medal with second oak leaf cluster, the Vietnam Service Medal with three bronze stars, the Expert Qualification Badge with Machine Gun Rifle and Grenade Bars should be included on his separation document.

On 2 April 1996, the applicant was issued a DD Form 215 (Correction to the DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty).  The applicant’s DD Form 214 was amended to add the above named awards.  The Army Commendation Medal with first oak leaf cluster was deleted.



The applicant’s petition for the Bronze Star Medal with first oak leaf cluster and the Air Medal was denied.  The denial was based on the fact that there was no evidence of general orders awarding the applicant the Bronze Star Medal with first oak leaf cluster and that there were no flight records in the applicant’s personnel records to confirm the number or the type of aerial missions in which he participated in. 

The Air Medal is awarded to any person who, while serving in any capacity in or with the United States, shall have distinguished himself/herself by meritorious achievement while participating in aerial flight 

The Bronze Star Medal is awarded to any person who, while serving in the capacity in or with the Army of the United States after 6 December 1941, distinguished himself/herself by heroic or meritorious achievement or service, not involving participating in aerial flight in connection with military operations involving conflict with an opposing armed force in which the United States is not the belligerent party.  “V” Device denotes valor.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion(s), it is concluded:

1. 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 the aforementioned requirement

2.  In regard to the applicant’s request for the Bronze Star Medal with oak leaf cluster and the Air Medal, there is no evidence in his military records nor has the applicant provided any evidence which indicates that he was authorized these awards.  The primary requirement for award of a decoration is that a formal recommendation must be prepared and administratively entered into official military channels by someone having witnessed or with knowledge of the act.  



3.  In view of the foregoing there is no basis for granting the applicant’s requests.

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

                       DENY APPLICATION




						Karl F. Schneider
						Acting Director