IN THE CASE OF:	

		BOARD DATE:	  13 August 2008

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080007254 


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, in effect, award of the Air Medal (AM).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was awarded the AM at the same time he received his Purple Heart (PH) while in the hospital in Japan.  He now requests the AM be added to his separation document (DD Form 214).

3.  The applicant provides his DD Form 214 and ABCMR Letter, dated 21 March 2008, 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 record shows he enlisted in the Regular Army and entered active duty on 26 September 1968.  He was trained in and awarded the primary military occupational specialty (MOS) of 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman), and the highest rank he attained while serving on active duty was specialist five (SP5).  

3.  The applicant's Enlisted Qualification Record (DA Form 20) shows he served in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) from 4 May 1969 through 11 July 1969.  Item 38 (Record of Assignments) shows that during his RVN tour, he was assigned to the Company A, 1st Battalion, 2nd Infantry, 1st Infantry Division, performing duties in MOS 11B as a rifleman.  

4.  Item 41 (Awards and Decorations) of the applicant's DA Form 20 does not include the AM in the list of awards entered, and his record is void of any orders or other documents showing he was ever recommended for or awarded the AM by proper authority while serving on active duty.  

5.  On 5 October 1970, the applicant was honorably discharged by reason of physical disability with severance pay, after completing a total of 2 years, 
3 months, and 24 days of active military service.  The DD Form 214 he was issued at that time shows he earned the following awards:  PH; National Defense Service Medal; Vietnam Service Medal with 2 bronze service stars; RVN Campaign Medal with 1960 Device; Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle (M14 & M16) Bar; and Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Machinegun (M-60) Bar.  The AM was not included in the list of awards contained on the DD Form 214 and the applicant authenticated the separation document with his signature in Item 32 (Signature of Person Being Transferred or Discharged) on the date of his discharge.  

6.  The record shows the applicant's record was administratively corrected and a 
DD Form 215 was issued documenting these corrections on 16 June 2008.  This correction added the Combat Infantryman Badge, Army Good Conduct Medal, Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation Badge, Valorous Unit Award, and Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Grenade Bar to the awards already listed on the applicant's DD Form 214.  It also amended Item 30 (Remarks) of the original DD Form 214 by adding the entry "SERVICE IN VIETMAN FROM: 4 MAY 969 to 2 JULY 1969." 

7.  During the processing of this case, a member of the Board the Department of the Army (DA) Awards and Decorations Computer Assisted Retrieval System (ADCARS), which contains award orders issued during the Vietnam Era.  There were no AM orders pertaining to the applicant on file on ADCARS.  

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes the Army's awards policy.  Paragraph 3-15 contains guidance on the AM.  It states, in pertinent part, that it is awarded in time of war for heroism and for meritorious achievement or service while participating in aerial flight. The AM is awarded to any person who, while serving in any capacity in or with the U.S. Army, will have distinguished himself or herself by meritorious achievement while participating in aerial flight. Awards may be made to recognize single acts of merit or heroism, or for meritorious service.

9.  United States Army Vietnam (USARV) Regulation 672-1 (Decorations and Awards) provided local USARV awards policy.  It also established guidelines for award of the AM in the RVN.  It defined terms and provided guidelines for the award based upon the number and types of missions or hours.  Combat missions were divided into three categories:  Category I (air assault and equally dangerous missions); Category II (support rendered a friendly force immediately before, during or immediately following a combat operation); and Category III (support of friendly forces not connected with an immediate combat operation).  

10.  The USARV awards regulation stipulated that to be recommended for award of the AM, an individual must have completed a minimum of 25 Category I missions, 50 Category II missions, or 100 Category III missions.  Since various types of missions would have been completed in accumulating flight time toward award of an AM for sustained operations, different computations would have had to be made to combine Category I, II and III flight time and adjust it to a common denominator.  A Category I mission was defined as a mission performed in a "combat assault" (CA) role; a Category II mission was defined as a mission performed in "direct combat support" (DCS) role; and a Category III mission was defined as one performed in an "other combat support" (OCS) role.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that he is entitled to the AM was carefully considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence to support his claim.  

2.  By regulation the AM is awarded in time of war for heroism and for meritorious achievement or service while participating in aerial flight to any person who, while serving in any capacity in or with the U.S. Army, will have distinguished himself or herself by meritorious achievement while participating in aerial flight.  

3.  The evidence of record fails to show the applicant was ever recommended for or awarded the AM by proper authority while serving on active duty, and his record is void of any flight records confirming he completed the necessary hours and missions to qualify for award of the AM.  
4.  Further, the AM is not included in the list of awards contained in Item 41 of his DA Form 20, or the list of awards contained on his DD Form 214, which he authenticated with his signature on the date of his separation.  In effect, his signature was his verification that the information contained on the DD Form 214, to include the list of awards was correct at the time the document was prepared and issued.  As a result, absent any evidence of record or independent evidence that confirms the applicant qualified for or was awarded the AM, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to grant the requested relief. 

5.  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 this requirement.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___x____  ___x____  ____x___  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.




      _______ _x   _______   ___
               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)                                         AR20080007254



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080007254



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1