MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
        


         BOARD DATE: 13 JUNE 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2001066260

         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. Kenneth H. Aucock		Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Ms. Celia L. Adolphi		Chairperson
Ms. Barbara J. Ellis		Member
Mr. Donald P. Hupman, Jr.		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: In effect, the applicant requests that his award of the Air Medal for heroism be upgraded to a higher award, and the general order announcing the award be corrected to show that he secured a fragmentation instead of a gas grenade and that the order reflect his actions regarding this incident.

APPLICANT STATES: That the highlighted portion (showing “they…. Their alertness in discovering and securing a gas grenade with pin pulled prevented the possible loss of the aircraft and loss of …) of General Orders Number 4990, Headquarters, 1^st Aviation Brigade, dated 12 June 1970, which he submits with his request, is incorrect. He stated that he was the flight engineer on the aircraft and he was the one who found the fragmentation grenade with the pin pulled. He stated that he was the one, who without any thought, grabbed the grenade, holding it so it would not explode. He used a pin from a smoke grenade to insert into the fragmentation grenade, then threw the smoke grenade out of the aircraft. He believes that he should receive a much higher award than the Air Medal for his actions, perhaps the Medal of Honor. Not until recently did he discover what was written [in the General Order], and he now realizes why he received only an Air Medal for risking his life and saving others.

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

The1996 Defense Authorization Act established a provision whereby upon request by a Member of Congress the Secretary of the Army can review proposals for awards, or the upgrading of a decoration, that would not otherwise be authorized due to limitations established by law or policy for timely submission of a recommendation for such an award. This new provision in the law provides an individual an opportunity to have his or her congressional representative initiate a recommendation on his or her behalf. An individual who elects to pursue this avenue may contact his or her congressional representative, provide that person with the details of his or her actions including any supporting statements, and then have the representative initiate an appropriate award recommendation. The Awards Branch of the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) would be the agency designated by the Secretary of the Army to review new award recommendations initiated under this provision of law.

In view of the information contained above, the Board will not address the applicant’s request to upgrade his award of the Air Medal for heroism. The applicant may want to pursue this matter with his congressional representative.

The applicant entered on active duty on 21 March 1968, completed training as an aircraft maintenance crewman, MOS (Military Occupational Specialty) 67, and in February 1969 was assigned to the 147^th Aviation Company in Vietnam, first as a door gunner and later as a helicopter flight engineer.

The applicant was promoted to pay grade E-5 on 10 August 1969. He was awarded the Air Medal for meritorious achievement for the period 7 March 1969 to 19 June 1969. On 12 June 1970 the applicant and two other soldiers were awarded the Air Medal Second Award with “V” device for their actions on 8 April 1970. This is the award which the applicant takes exception to. On 14 October 1970 the applicant was awarded the Army Commendation Medal (First Oak Leaf Cluster) for meritorious service for the period November 1969 to September 1970. The applicant participated in seven campaigns during his tour in Vietnam. The applicant returned to the United States and was released from active duty on 30 October 1970. He had 2 years, 7 months, and 10 days of service. His DD Form 214 shows award of the National Defense Service Medal, Vietnam Service Medal, Vietnam Campaign Medal, Air Medal, Good Conduct Medal, and the Army Commendation Medal. That form also shows completion of Aircraft Maintenance Crewman course at Fort Rucker, Alabama in 1968.

The applicant has provided no evidence concerning the matter at hand and no information, other than his self authored statement.

Army Regulation 600-8-22, provides in pertinent part, that an Aircraft Crew Member Badge may be awarded by any commander of a unit with aircraft assigned to individuals in a flying status as crewmembers and to non-crewmembers who hold principal assignments as observers, medical aidmen, gunners, maintenance supervisors or technical inspectors.

That regulation also states that the Aircraft Crew Member Badge may be permanently awarded to soldiers upon successful completion of formal advanced individual training in career management field 67 MOS. Current awards are authorized based on documented prior advanced training.

By virtue of his assignment in Vietnam the applicant is entitled to award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm and the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation. By virtue of his participation in seven campaigns during his tour in Vietnam, the applicant is entitled to award of the Vietnam Service Medal with one silver service star (denoting participation in five campaigns) and two bronze service stars.

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 applicant has not provided any evidence to support his contentions . His actions and those of his fellow soldiers were indeed heroic as indicated in the General Order announcing the award. Nonetheless, there is no evidence and no information, other than the applicant’s statements, to correct the information in the General Order awarding him the Air Medal with “V” device. There is insufficient evidence to grant his request.

2. The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of his request.

3. 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 that requirement.

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.

NOTE: The Army Review Boards Agency in St. Louis should correct the applicant’s records to show award of the Air Medal, Second Award with “V” device, the Army Commendation Medal with First Oak Leaf Cluster, the Aircraft Crew Member Badge, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm, the Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation, and the Vietnam Service Medal with one silver service star and two bronze service stars.

BOARD VOTE:

________ ________ ________ GRANT

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__CLA_ _ __BJE __ __DPH __ DENY APPLICATION

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

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001066260
SUFFIX
RECON	YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED	20020613
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION	DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1.	107.00
2.	102.1
3.
4.
5.
6.