IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	        11 September 2008

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080010884 


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 correction of his DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show award of the Air Medal. 

2.  The applicant states that the Air Medal is missing from his DD Form 214 and that his previous commander brought this error to his attention.  He contends that at the time of his discharge a records review was not required and he wanted out of the service.   

3.  The applicant provides a statement from his commanding officer at the time in question.

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 was inducted on 8 November 1967.  He served as a light weapons infantryman assigned to Company D, 2nd Battalion, 8th Cavalry of the 1st Cavalry Division  in Vietnam and was released from active duty on 
22 October 1969.  

3.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 does not show the Air Medal as an authorized award.

4.  There are no orders for the Air Medal in the applicant’s service personnel records.    

5.  In support of his claim, the applicant provided a statement, dated 
18 November 2006, from his commanding officer at the time in question.  He attests that the applicant was involved in many combat assaults by helicopter including insertions and extractions from landing zones, some of which were “hot.”  He contends that the fact that the applicant was not awarded the Air Medal was an oversight and that the applicant met the criteria for award of this medal.  

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.  Combat missions were divided 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.  To be recommended for award of the Air Medal, 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 Air Medal 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.

9.  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.  There are no orders for the Air Medal in the available records.  In the absence of orders or other evidence of record showing that the applicant received the Air Medal, the statement provided by the applicant’s Commanding Officer at the time in question is not sufficient as a basis for award of the Air Medal.  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence on which to base award of the Air Medal in this case.

2.  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

___xx___  ___xx___  ___xx___  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.



      _______ xxxx_______   ___
               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)                                         AR20080010884





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080010884



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1