RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


         IN THE CASE OF:
        

         BOARD DATE: FEBRUARY 3, 2004
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2003089955


         I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director
Mr. Luis Almodova		Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler		Chairperson
Ms. Regan K. Smith		Member
Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		Member

         The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any).


1. The applicant requests that he be awarded the Bronze Star Medal.

2. The applicant states that he never received the Bronze Star Medal that he was recommended for, for an action that occurred on 10 May 1968, while he served in Vietnam.

3. The applicant provides a copy of a letter addressed to his Member of Congress from the Chief, Military Awards Branch, US Total Army Personnel Command, dated 30 January 2003; a copy of a DA Form 638, Recommendation for Award, addressed to the Secretary of the Army, from his Member of Congress dated, 13 November 2002; an unsigned and undated statement from an Army captain recommending the applicant for the award; a copy of his DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or Discharge) or (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), with the effective dates of 20 November 1967, 20 February 1971, and 29 September 1995; and a copy of his retirement NGB Form 22, National Guard Bureau, Report of Separation and Record of Service, with an effective date of 1 November 2000.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 2 years on 9 November 1966. Following completion of basic combat training he was sent to Fort Wolters, Texas, to undergo Warrant Officer Candidate training. He was advanced to the rank and pay grade Specialist Five, E-5, on 6 February 1967. The applicant completed the Warrant Officer Primary Helicopter School, Phase I and Phase II, and was assigned to the US Army Aviation School, Fort Rucker, Alabama, to complete his training as a helicopter pilot. The applicant completed the Warrant Officer Candidate, Rotary Wing Aviator Course, on 20 November 1967.

2. The applicant was discharged on 20 November 1967 in the rank and pay grade, Specialist Five, E-5, under the provisions of Army Regulation
(AR) 635-200, to accept an appointment as a warrant officer. On his discharge date, the applicant had 1 year and 12 days active military service, with no lost time. Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized), of the applicant's DD Form 214, for his enlisted service, shows he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal; the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge, with Rifle Bar [M-14 Rifle]; the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Automatic Rifle Bar [M-16 Rifle]; and the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge, with .45 Caliber Pistol Bar.

---

3. The applicant entered active duty in the rank and pay grade Warrant Officer One, W-1, and was awarded the military occupational specialty (MOS) 100B, Utility/Observation Helicopter Pilot, on 21 November 1967.

4. The applicant served in the Republic of Vietnam during the period 23 January 1968 through 4 January 1969, participating in the following five campaigns: the Vietnam Counteroffensive, Phase III, which extended from 1 June 1967 through 29 January 1968; the Tet Counteroffensive, which extended from 30 January through 1 April 1968; the Vietnam Counteroffensive, Phase IV, which extended from 2 April through 30 June 1968; the Vietnam Counteroffensive, Phase V, which extended from 1 July through 1 November 1968; and the Vietnam Counteroffensive, Phase VI, which extended from 2 November 1968 through 22 February 1969.

5. The applicant did not receive the Bronze Star Medal for meritorious achievement or service, or for heroism, while he served in Vietnam.

6. The applicant was honorably released from active duty on 20 February 1971 at the expiration of his active duty commitment under the provisions of AR 635-200, in the rank and pay grade of Chief Warrant Officer Two, W-2, with a total of 4 years, 3 months, and 12 days, combined enlisted and warrant officer military service. Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of his DD Form 214, shows he was awarded the following awards: the Air Medal; the National Defense Service Medal; the Vietnam Service Medal; the Vietnam Campaign Medal, with '60 Device; the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross, with Palm, Unit Citation; and the Army Aviator Badge.

7. After his release from active duty, the applicant continued to serve in the Reserve and in the National Guard. On 1 November 2000, the applicant was honorably discharged from the Kansas Army National Guard in the rank and pay grade Chief Warrant Officer Four, W-4, for the purpose of retirement. The NGB Form 22 he was given on his separation from the Kansas Army National Guard shows he was awarded the following throughout his career: the National Defense Service Medal; the Army Aviator Badge; the Senior Army Aviator Badge; the Master Army Aviator Badge; the Vietnam Service Medal with one silver service star; the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal, with '60 Device; the Air Medal, with Numeral 31; the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross, with Palm, Unit Citation; the Good Conduct Medal; the Army Reserve Components Achievement Medal with five oak leaf clusters; the Army Service Medal; the Armed Forces Reserve Medal, with one bronze hourglass device; and the Army Achievement Medal.

---

8. AR 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that the Bronze Star Medal is awarded in time of war for heroism and for meritorious achievement or service. It is awarded to any person who, while serving in any capacity in or with the Army of the United States after 6 December 1941, distinguished himself or herself by heroic or meritorious achievement or service, not involving participation in aerial flight, (emphasis added) in connection with military operations against an armed enemy; or while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party. Awards may be made for acts of heroism, performed under circumstances described above, which are of lesser degree than required for the award of the Silver Star. The Bronze Star Medal may be awarded for meritorious achievement or meritorious service according to recognize single acts of merit or meritorious service. The lesser degree than that required for the award of the Legion of Merit must nevertheless have been meritorious and accomplished with distinction. As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required. Recommendations must be made within 2 years of the event or period of service and the award must be made within 3 years.

9. A recommendation for award of the Bronze Star Medal to the applicant was processed through his Member of Congress to the Secretary of the Army. The recommendation was forwarded to the Army Decorations Board for consideration and on 9 January 2003, the board determined that the degree of action and service rendered did not meet the strict criteria for the purposed award. The recommendation for award of the Bronze Star Medal to the applicant was disapproved and he was so notified on 30 January 2003.

10. The statement submitted as an enclosure to the DA Form 638 for consideration by the Army Decorations Board, and for this Board's consideration, is undated and unsigned. The applicant's officer evaluation report for the period of the alleged action, 10 May 1968, was reviewed to determine if the recommending officer was a member of the applicant's chain of command. The person whose name appears on the statement did not serve as his rater, indorser, or reviewer, in the evaluation report for the period.

11. The statement that was submitted for consideration describes immediate actions that the applicant took, while engaged in aerial flight, to find a place to land his aircraft, while risking his life and the lives of the members of the reconnaissance team, to save the life of a Special Forces long-range reconnaissance patrol team leader, who in haste had failed to secure himself for the extraction from the landing zone.

---

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1. The statement, which was submitted to this Board for consideration for award of the Bronze Star Medal to the applicant, is both undated and unsigned.

2. The author of the statement was not identified as being in the applicant's chain of command during the period for which he was recommended for award of the Bronze Star Medal.

3. The regulation applicable to the military awards program makes it very clear that the Bronze Star Medal is awarded in time of war for heroism and for meritorious achievement or service. It is awarded to any person who, while serving in any capacity in or with the Army of the United States, distinguished himself or herself by heroic or meritorious achievement or service, not involving participation in aerial flight. The activities that are described clearly are related to aerial flight.

4. The applicant has not provided an explanation why it took him in excess of 34 years to seek an award that he believes he should have received for an action in Vietnam. The applicant, after being released from active duty, continued to be affiliated with the Army National Guard and the US Army Reserve and had access to regulations applicable to the Army Awards Program and to individuals who were versed in the subject.

5. The time for the recommendation to have been surfaced and acted upon should have been made immediately after the action, but no later than two years after the date of the action, 10 May 1968.

BOARD VOTE:

________ ________ ________ GRANT RELIEF

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

rks_____ sac_____ clg_____ 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.





                  ____Samuel A. Crumpler____
                  CHAIRPERSON

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003089955
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED	20040203
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
DATE OF DISCHARGE
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION	DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 46	107.0000
2. 60	107.0014
3.
4.
5.
6.