IN THE CASE OF:	   

		BOARD DATE:	        2 December 2008

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080015843 


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 an earlier request for the Air Medal. He also requests, as new issues, award of Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, the Meritorious Unit Commendation, and the Presidential Unit Citation.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he has correspondence from a fellow Soldier who was in his unit stating that they were awarded the Air Medal, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, the Meritorious Unit Commendation, and the Presidential Unit Citation.  

3.  The applicant provides three emails from a fellow Soldier; orders, dated 
26 December 1974 and 13 November 1969; and numerous newspaper articles.  

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 AR20080001951 on 8 July 2008.

2.  The new evidence provided by the applicant will be considered by the Board.

3.  The applicant was inducted on 27 December 1965.  He arrived in Vietnam on 8 October 1966.  He served as an ammunition helper assigned to Battery C, 7th Battalion, 13th Artillery in Vietnam from 28 October 1966 through 3 November 1967.  On 6 November 1967, he was released from active duty in the rank of private first class after completing 1 year, 10 months, and 10 days of creditable active service with no time lost.

4.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or Discharge) shows the National Defense Service Medal, the Vietnam Service Medal, the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960), two awards of the Overseas Service Bar, and the Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar as authorized awards.

5.  There are no orders for the Air Medal in the available records.  A search of the U. S. Army Human Resource Command's Awards and Decorations Computer Assisted Retrieval System (ADCARS) did not locate orders awarding the applicant the Air Medal.

6.  In support of his claim, the applicant provided three emails from a fellow Soldier at the time in question.  He attests that he rode in a truck with the applicant in the summer of 1967, that he did not remember how long the applicant was in the unit, that on 22 July 1967 a 1st Cavalry Officer came out to one of their landing zones on a artillery raid and told them that they had been recommended for the Air Medal, and that they never received the medal.  He states that while he was with the unit they made 13 to 15 raids which qualified for the Air Medal but the bureaucrats never completed the paperwork and that he had several articles and photos regarding the air raids, casualties, and the general efforts of the unit in supporting the 1st Cavalry operations.   

7.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) lists the unit awards received by units serving in Vietnam.  This document shows the applicant's unit is eligible for award of the Meritorious Unit Commendation for actions during the period 9 November 1966 to 31 December 1968 based on Department of the Army General Orders Number 70, dated 1969.

8.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 also shows the applicant's unit is eligible for award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation based on Department of the Army General Orders Number 54, dated 1974.

9.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 does not show the applicant’s unit was not cited for award of the Presidential Unit Citation while he was assigned to it.

10.  Records show the applicant participated in two campaigns during his assignment.

11.  There is no evidence the applicant received the first award of the Good Conduct Medal.  There also is no evidence the applicant was disqualified by his chain of command from receiving the Good Conduct Medal.  His records show he received conduct and efficiency ratings of “excellent” throughout his service.

12.  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.  

13.  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.

14.  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.

15.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, 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.  
16.  Army Regulation 672-5-1, in effect at the time, provided policy and criteria concerning individual military decorations.  It stated that the Army Good Conduct Medal was awarded for each 3 years of continuous enlisted active Federal military service completed on or after 27 August 1940 and, for the first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June 1950 of less than 3 years but more than 1 year.  At the time, a Soldier's conduct and efficiency ratings must 
have been rated as "excellent" for the entire period of qualifying service except that a service school efficiency rating based upon academic proficiency of at 
least "good" rendered subsequent to 22 November 1955 was not disqualifying.  However, there was no right or entitlement to the medal until the immediate commander made positive recommendation for its award and until the awarding authority announced the award in General Orders.

17.  Army Regulation 600-8-22, in pertinent part, authorizes award of a bronze service star, based on qualifying service, for each campaign listed in Appendix B of this regulation and states that authorized bronze service stars will be worn on the appropriate service medal.

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 emails provided by the applicant are not sufficient as a basis for award of the Air Medal.  In addition, the emails provided by the applicant indicated his unit had made "13 to 15 raids which qualified for the Air Medal."  That does not appear to have met the eligibility criteria of having accrued 25 hours of Category I mission flight time.  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence on which to base award of the Air Medal in this case.

2.  The applicant’s unit was cited for award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation and the Meritorious Unit Commendation while he was assigned to it.

3.  The applicant’s unit was not cited for award of the Presidential Unit Citation while he was assigned to it.  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence on which to base award of the Presidential Unit Citation in this case.

4.  The applicant was separated in the rank of private first class with 22 months of creditable active service with no time lost.  It appears the applicant met the eligibility criteria for the first award of the Good Conduct Medal for the period 
27 December 1965 through 6 November 1967 based on completion of a period of qualifying service ending with the termination of a period of Federal military service.  Therefore, his records should be corrected to show this award.
5.  The applicant participated in two campaigns during his assignment in Vietnam which makes him eligible for award of the Vietnam Service Medal with two bronze service stars.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  In regard to the applicant's request for award of the Air Medal, 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 AR20080001951, dated 8 July 2008.

2.  With regard to the applicant's remaining issues for award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, the Meritorious Unit Commendation, and the Presidential Unit Citation, the Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: 

	a.  awarding him the first award of the Good Conduct Medal for the period 
27 December 1965 through 6 November 1967; and
   
   b.  adding the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, the Meritorious Unit Commendation, the Good Conduct Medal, and two bronze service stars for wear on his already-awarded Vietnam Service Medal to his DD Form 214.

3.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends 




denial of so much of the application that pertains to award of the Presidential Unit Citation.  





      _______ _   _______   ___
               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)                                         AR20080015843





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080015843



6


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1