DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20090002899 


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 two separate applications and through a Member of Congress, that the Silver Star (SS) and Defense Meritorious Service Medal (DMSM) be added to his official military personnel file (OMPF) and that he be awarded the Air Medal (AM).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that the original SS recommendation was lost; however, it was subsequently awarded to him on 18 December 2008.  He further claims the DMSM he earned was not documented in his OMPF.  He also indicates that he flew more than 50 hours in support of combat missions while serving in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) and as a result should have been awarded the AM.  He claims he has the flight log to prove it.

3.  The applicant provides the following documents in support of his application:  DMSM announcement memorandum and certificate, DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award), SS certificate, and facsimile transmission coversheet.  However, the flight log referred to by the applicant was not included with the 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 military record shows he initially enlisted in the Regular Army and entered active duty in an enlisted status on 6 July 1966.  He served in this status until being honorably discharged in order to accept a commission on 5 June 1967.  The DD Form 214 issued to him at that time shows he held the rank of specialist five (SP5), that he completed 11 months of creditable active duty service, and that he earned the National Defense Service Medal (NDSM), Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM), and Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle (M-14) Bar.

3.  On 6 June 1967, the applicant was commissioned as a second lieutenant in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) and entered active duty in that status.

4.  The applicant’s OMPF contains Headquarters, I Field Force Vietnam Artillery, General Orders Number 144, dated 19 February 1969, which awarded him the Bronze Star Medal (BSM) for meritorious service in connection with military operations against an armed enemy while serving in the RVN during the period February 1968 to February 1969.  It also shows that he was assigned for duty with Headquarters, 2nd Battalion, 17th Artillery Regiment, during that time.

5.  On 10 March 1969, the applicant was honorably released from active duty and transferred to the USAR Control Group.  The DD Form 214 issued him at that time shows he completed a total of 2 years, 8 months, and 5 days of creditable active duty service.  Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) shows that he earned the BSM, Purple Heart, Vietnam Service Medal (VSM), and RVN Campaign Medal.

6.  The applicant’s record contains an ARPC Form 249-E (Chronological Statement of Retirement Points) which shows he served in various statuses of the USAR through 29 November 1995, at which time he was transferred to the Retired Reserve.  This document confirms he completed a total of 21 years and 11 months of creditable military service for Reserve retirement at age 60.

7.  The applicant’s record also contains an SS certificate issued on 12 December 2008 and an accompanying citation which shows he was awarded the SS for gallantry in action in the RVN on 3 April 1968.  Page two of a DA Form 638 provided by the applicant confirms this award was authorized and announced in U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) Permanent Order 
Number 353-07, dated 18 December 2008.

8.  The applicant also provides a Headquarters, Special Operations Command Pacific, memorandum, dated 3 March 1995, which announced his award of the DMSM in recognition of his exceptionally meritorious service from the period 1 April 1987 to 30 March 1995 in honor of his retirement.  He also provides a copy of the DMSM certificate.

9.  During the processing of this case, a member of the Board staff contacted the HRC, Military Awards Branch (MAB) to obtain a complete copy of the DA Form 638 and to verify the applicant’s SS award.  An MAB official confirmed that HRC awarded the applicant the SS in Permanent Order Number 353-07, dated 18 December 2008, that the DA Form 638 was the official announcement and authorization for the award, and that separate SS orders were not published.  A complete copy of the DA Form 638 that awarded the applicant the SS, both pages 1 and 2, was provided by this MAB official.

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes the Army's awards policy.  Paragraph 2-13 of the awards regulation contains guidance on award of the VSM and states, in pertinent part, that a bronze service star is authorized with this award for each campaign a member is credited with participating in while serving in the RVN.  A silver service star is used to denote five bronze service stars.

11.  Paragraph 3-15 of Army Regulation 600-8-22 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.

12.  U.S. 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).

13.  U.S. Army Vietnam Regulation 672-1 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" role; a Category II mission was defined as a mission performed in "direct combat support" role; and a Category III mission was defined as one performed in an "other combat support" role.

14.  Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) establishes the eligibility of individual members for campaign participation credit, assault landing credit, and unit citation badges awarded during the Vietnam Conflict.  It confirms that during his tenure of assignment in the RVN, the applicant’s unit (2nd Battalion, 17th Artillery) earned the RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation.  It also confirms that participation credit was granted for the TET Counteroffensive, Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase IV, Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase V, Vietnam Counteroffensive Phase VI, and TET 69 Counteroffensive campaigns.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention that the SS and DMSM should be documented in his OMPF was carefully considered and found to have merit.  The evidence of record confirms the applicant was awarded the SS for his gallantry in action while serving in the RVN on 3 April 1968, as evidenced by the SS certificate and DA Form 638 obtained from the HRC MAB.  Therefore, it would be appropriate to file the DA Form 638 in the applicant’s OMPF and to add the SS to the list of awards contained in item 24 of his 10 March 1969 DD Form 214 which documented his active duty service from 6 June 1967 to 10 March 1969.

2.  The evidence of record also confirms the applicant served in the RVN during the period February 1968 to February 1969, as evidenced by the official orders on file that awarded him the BSM.  Based on his RVN service and campaign participation, he is also eligible for the RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation and one silver service star with his VSM.  Therefore, it would also be appropriate to add these awards to his record and to the list of awards contained on his 10 March 1969 DD Form 214 at this time.

3.  The evidence shows that the applicant was awarded the DMSM on 18 March 1995 in honor of his Reserve retirement, as evidenced by official announcement memorandum and certificate he provides.  Accordingly, copies of this award announcement memorandum and certificate should be filed in the applicant's OMPF; however, there are no regulatory provisions that provide for altering or correcting a DD Form 214 to add accomplishments completed subsequent to the period of active duty documented by the DD Form 214.  Therefore, since the applicant was awarded the DMSM in honor of his retirement from the USAR subsequent to his completion of his active duty service, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support adding this award to his 10 March 1969 DD Form 214.

4.  The applicant’s contention that he should have been awarded the AM based on his combat flight missions was also carefully considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence to support this claim.  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.  Further, although the applicant indicated he had flight logs to confirm his participation in combat flight missions, he failed to provide these logs with his application.  Therefore, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support granting this portion of the requested relief.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

____x___  ____x___  ___x____  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  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.  deleting the current entry contained in item 24 of his 10 March 1969 DD Form 214 and replacing it with the entry "National Defense Service Medal, Silver Star, Bronze Star Medal, Army Good Conduct Medal, Vietnam Service Medal with one silver service star, Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960), Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with M-14 Rifle Bar, and Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation" and providing him a correction to his DD Form 214 that includes these awards; and 
	b.  filing his Defense Meritorious Service Medal award announcement memorandum and certificate in his OMPF.

2.  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 Air Medal.



      ____________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)                                         AR20090002899



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20090002899



6


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1