IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	       18 SEPTEMBER 2008

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080010008 


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 reconsideration of his denial for award of the Air Medal (AM).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he is submitting 2 sworn affidavits from fellow Soldiers who had close first-hand knowledge of his participation in combat air assaults as an infantryman in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN).  

3.  The applicant provides 2 supporting statements.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20060017031, on 7 June 2007.

2.  The applicant was inducted and served in the Army of the U.S. from
28 August 1967 – 3 April 1969.  He served in the RVN from 21 February 1968 –
31 March 1969.  The period in question is from 21 February – 23 April 1968 while assigned to Company D, 5th Battalion, 7th Cavalry of the 1st Cavalry Division as a rifleman.  He contends that he fulfilled the requirements for award of the AM.  Thereafter, he performed duties as a combat illustrator.


3.  The first sworn affidavit provided by the applicant is from the applicant's infantry squad leader when he was assigned to Company D, 5th Battalion, 
7th Cavalry.  This statement indicates that the unit was a part of an airmobile division, and since they were not assigned to a base camp, they were continually "in the field."  The unit relied heavily on helicopters for their combat air assaults.  Combat air assaults were performed on a regular and, sometimes, daily basis.  He attests that the applicant participated in many combat air assaults. 

4.  The second sworn affidavit is provided by the applicant's company clerk who states that he did not monitor the daily line company operations of assaults via aerial transportation; however, whenever a line trooper was required for movement from one place to another, the mode of transportation was by helicopter, as it was the standard operating procedure of the 1st Air Cavalry.  It is his opinion that any line company trooper would automatically accumulate sufficient air time hours to qualify for the AM.  It is also his opinion that the applicant is entitled to award of the AM based on the time he spent in the field.

5.  The sworn affidavits are new evidence and were not considered in the Board's previous decision.

6.  U.S. Army Vietnam (USARV) Regulation 672-1 (Decorations and Awards) provided, in pertinent part, guidelines for award of the Air Medal.  It established that passenger personnel who did not participate in an air assault were not eligible for the award based upon sustained operations.  It defined terms and provided guidelines for the award based upon the number and types of missions 
or hours.  Twenty-five Category I missions (air assault and equally dangerous missions) and accrual of a minimum of 25 hours of flight time while engaged in Category I missions was the standard established for which sustained operations were deemed worthy of recognition by an award of the Air Medal.  However, the regulation was clear that these guidelines were considered only a departure point.  

7.  The USARV awards regulation divided combat missions into three categories. A category I mission was defined as a mission performed in an assault role in which a hostile force was engaged and was characterized by delivery of ordnance against the hostile force, or delivery of friendly troops or supplies into the immediate combat operations area.  A category II mission was characterized by support rendered a friendly force immediately before, during or immediately following a combat operation.  A category III mission was characterized by support of friendly forces not connected with an immediate combat operation but which must have been accomplished at altitudes which made the aircraft at times vulnerable to small arms fire, or under hazardous weather or terrain conditions.

8.  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 contends that he should be awarded the AM because his duties included his participation in combat air assaults as an infantryman in the RVN. 
The applicant provided 2 sworn affidavits as new evidence which described the nature of the unit's combat air assaults, their frequency, and attested to his participation in these air assaults.  

2.  The applicant was assigned to Company D, 5th Battalion, 7th Cavalry as a rifleman for a period of 2 months.  The standard established by Army regulations for award of the AM was 25 Category I missions (air assault and equally dangerous missions) and accrual of a minimum of 25 hours of flight time while engaged in Category I missions.  While the applicant's squad leader indicates that their combat air missions were "frequent, sometimes daily" and that the applicant participated in these missions, this statement alone, and in the absence of flight records or other corroborating documentation, is insufficient evidence to support award of the AM.  

3.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant did not submit any evidence that would warrant a change in the Board's previous decision.

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





BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__XXX __  __XXX__  __XXX__   DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20060017031, dated 7 June 2007.

2.  The Board wants the applicant and all others concerned to know that this action in no way diminishes the sacrifices made by the applicant in service to our Nation.  The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of his service in arms.



      ___        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)                                         AR20080010008



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080010008



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1