IN THE CASE OF:	  

	BOARD DATE:	  19 June 2008

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080002022 


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 award of the Silver Star, the Presidential Unit Citation, and all awards and decorations he is entitled to as a result of his service in the Republic of Vietnam. 

2.  The applicant states that he participated in the Son Tay Prisoner of War raid in January 1968 in Vietnam.  He further adds that there were 86 participants in this raid, 7 of which were officers.

3.  The applicant provided a copy of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge), dated 5 July 1969, in support of his application.

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's records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 3 years on 25 July 1966.  He completed basic combat and advanced individual training and was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 62H (Surfacing Equipment Specialist).  The highest rank/grade he attained during his military service was specialist four (SP4)/E-4.  He was honorably separated and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group (Annual Training) on 5 July 1969.  

3.  The applicant’s records show that he completed two periods of foreign service as follows: 

	a.  Korea, from 6 January 1967 to 5 February 1968; he was assigned as an electrician to Company B, 802nd Engineer Battalion (Construction), and  

	b.  Germany, from 14 March 1968 to 4 July 1969; he was assigned as a power roller/concrete machine operator to the 535th Engineer Company.

4.  The applicant’s records do not show he completed any service in the Republic of Vietnam.

5.  Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant’s DD Form 214 shows he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, the Good Conduct Medal, the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, and the Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-14).  Item 24 does not show award of the Silver Star, the Presidential Unit Citation, or any Vietnam specific awards. 

6.  The applicant's records do not contain General Orders awarding him the Silver Star.

7.  During the processing of this case, a member of the Board staff reviewed the Awards and Decorations Computer Assisted Retrieval System (ADCARS) maintained by the Military Awards Branch of the United States Army Human Resources Command (HRC), which is an index of general orders issued during the Vietnam era between 1965 and 1973.  This review failed to reveal any Silver Star orders on file for the applicant.  

8.  On November 20-21, 1970, a joint force composed of U.S. Air Force Special Operations and rescue personnel and U.S. Army Special Forces, supported by U.S. Navy Carrier Task Force 77, made a daring raid on the Son Tay prison camp located less than 30 miles from Hanoi, North Vietnam.  The objective was to rescue as many as 100 U.S. captives thought to be held there.  The assault troops, in six helicopters accompanied by two C-130 aircraft, flew 400 miles to Son Tay from bases in Thailand.  U.S. Navy pilots made a diversionary raid while 116 USAF and Navy aircraft from seven air bases and three aircraft carriers flew refueling, surface-to-air missile suppression, fighter cover, close air support, early warning, communications support and reconnaissance missions.  Although no prisoners were found in camp, the raid was a brilliant success in transporting, landing and recovering an assault force of 92 USAF and 56 Army personnel without the loss of a single man.  Alhough no prisoners were rescued, the raid focused world attention on the plight of the prisoners of war (POWs), raised their morale and resulted in improved living conditions for all U.S. prisoners of the North Vietnamese. The men of the Joint Task Force earned the admiration of their countrymen for risking their lives in an attempt to bring freedom to others.  Of the original 100 Army Special Forces members of the force, 56 were selected for the mission, 6 were awarded the Distinguished Service Cross and 50 were awarded the Silver Star.

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part, that the Silver Star is awarded for gallantry in action against the enemy.  The required gallantry (spirited and conspicuous acts of heroism and courage) must have been performed with marked distinction.  As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required.

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22, in pertinent part, that the Presidential Unit Citation (known as the Distinguished Unit Citation until 3 November 1966) is awarded for extraordinary heroism in action.  A unit must display such gallantry, determination and esprit de corps in accomplishing its mission as would warrant award of the Distinguished Service Cross to an individual. 

11.  Title 10 of the United States Code, section 1130 (10 USC 1130) provides the legal authority for consideration of proposals for decorations not previously submitted in timely fashion.  It allows, in effect, that upon the request of a Member of Congress, the Secretary concerned shall review a proposal for the award or presentation of a decoration (or the upgrading of a decoration), either for an individual or a unit, that is not otherwise authorized to be presented or awarded due to limitations established by law or policy for timely submission of a recommendation for such award or presentation.  Based upon such review, the Secretary shall make a determination as to the merits of approving the award or presentation of the decoration.




DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s record is void of any formal recommendation, approval through the chain of command, or orders that show he was awarded the Silver Star.  Furthermore, there is no evidence in the available record and the applicant did not submit any substantiating evidence that shows the specific acts of heroism and courage against the enemy that he performed with marked distinction and led to awarding him the Silver Star.  

2.  The applicant's military service was from 25 July 1966 to 5 July 1969.  The Son Tay raid took place on 21 November 1970, some 16 months after the applicant had been separated.  Furthermore, 56 Special Forces members participated in that raid, all were awarded the Silver Star.  There is no evidence that the applicant was a member of that elite group.  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence in the applicant’s records to award the applicant the Silver Star in this case.

3.  While the available evidence is insufficient for awarding the applicant the Silver Star, this in no way affects the applicant’s right to pursue his claim for the Silver Star by submitting a request through his Member of Congress under the provisions of 10 USC 1130.

4.  With respect to award of the Presidential Unit Citation, the evidence of record shows that none of the units the applicant was assigned to during his military career was awarded the Presidential Unit Citation at the time of his service.  Therefore, he is not entitled to this award.

5.  With respect to Vietnam awards and decorations, there is no evidence that the applicant served in the Republic of Vietnam or provided direct combat support to the Republic of Vietnam while serving outside the geographical limits of the Republic of Vietnam.  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence to grant the applicant any Vietnam service or campaign awards.  

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__XXX __  __XXX__  __XXX__   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.




      ___        XXX                ___
                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)                                         AR20080002022





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080002022



5


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1