BOARD DATE:	  16 September 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100008724 


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, correction of his DD Forms 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge):

	a.  for the period ending 16 January 1967 to show award of the Good Conduct Medal; and

	b.  for the period ending 1 December 1969 to show award of the Air Medal with eighteen oak leaf clusters, Meritorious Unit Commendation, and Purple Heart.  

2.  The applicant states:

* the Good Conduct Medal isn't shown on either of his DD Forms 214
* he attached the flight book records showing additional flight time for two additional awards of the Air Medal
* the 1st Cavalry Division was awarded the Meritorious Unit Commendation while he was assigned to the unit
* he received shrapnel cuts to his face and left arm and two broken teeth caused by a rocket exploding close by as they removed a man who was pinned in a vehicle

3.  The applicant provides:
 
* DD Form 256A (Honorable Discharge Certificate)
* DD Form 214 for the period ending 16 January 1967 
* DD Form 214 for the period ending 1 December 1969
* General Orders Number 202 (Silver Star)
* Citation for Air Medal with 1st through 16th oak leaf clusters
* General Orders Number 533 (Air Medal)
* Eight pages of flight records
  
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 records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 30 December 1965 and completed warrant officer and aviator training.  He was discharged on 16 January 1967 to accept an appointment as a Reserve warrant officer of the Army on 17 January 1967.  He was awarded the military occupational specialty of helicopter pilot and attained the rank of Chief Warrant Officer Two. 

3.  His DA Form 66 (Officer Qualification Record) shows while serving in the Republic of Vietnam he was assigned to Battery E, 82d Artillery, 1st Cavalry Division (Air Mobile) performing duties as a rotary wing aviator during the period 15 February 1967 to 5 February 1968.

4.  He was honorably released from active duty on 1 December 1969 and transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve Control Group (Reinforcement).  The DD Form 214 he was issued for this period of service shows he completed a total of 3 years, 11 months, and 2 days of creditable active service including his enlisted service.  

5.  Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 1 December 1969 shows he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal, Air Medal, Army Aviator Badge, two overseas service bars, Silver Star, Vietnam Service Medal, Distinguished Flying Cross, and Bronze Star Medal.

6.  General Orders 101, dated 8 December 1966, show he was awarded the Good Conduct Medal for the period 30 December 1965 to 16 January 1967. 

7.  General Orders Number 533, dated 23 January 1968, awarded him the Air Medal with 1st through 16th oak leaf clusters for the period 21 March 1967 to 10 December 1967.

8.  The applicant provided photocopies of flight logs for the period 3 December 1967 to 1 February 1968.  These logs do not show the categories of the missions flown.  A DA Form 759 (Individual Flight Record - Army Aviator) shows he flew 40 combat missions during the period 11 December 1967 to 26 January 1968 totaling more than 25 hours of flight time.

9.  His name does not appear on the Vietnam Casualty Roster.

10.  There is no evidence in the available records and he did not provide any evidence which shows he was ever wounded or treated for wounds sustained as the result of hostile action.

11.  His records do not contain any evidence that indicates he was ever awarded the Purple Heart by proper authority.
 
12.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides that the Purple Heart is awarded for a wound sustained as a result of hostile action.  Substantiating evidence must be provided to verify that the wound was the result of hostile action, the wound must have required treatment by medical personnel, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record.

13.  A review of the Awards and Decorations Computer-Assisted Retrieval System (ADCARS) maintained by the Military Awards Branch of the United States Army Human Resources Command, which is an index of general orders issued during the Vietnam era between 1965 and 1973, failed to reveal any orders awarding him the Purple Heart.

14.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 shows the unit he was assigned to while serving in the Republic of Vietnam was awarded the:

	a.  Meritorious Unit Commendation based on Department of the Army General Orders (DAGO) Number 17, dated 1968; and

   b.  Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation based on DAGO Number 59, dated 1969.

15.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides that the Air Medal is awarded in time of war for heroism and for meritorious achievement or service while participating in aerial flight.  This award is primarily intended for personnel on flying status, but may also be awarded to those personnel whose combat duties require them to fly; for example, personnel in the attack elements of units involved in air-land assaults against an armed enemy.  As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders is required.

16.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 states Arabic numerals are now used instead of oak leaf clusters for the second and succeeding awards of the Air Medal.  The numeral 2 denotes the second award of the Air Medal.

17.  U.S. Army Vietnam (USARV) Regulation 672-1 (Decorations and Awards) provided guidelines for award of the Air Medal.  It stated 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.  

	a.  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.

	b.  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 times and adjust it to a common denominator.

18.  Appendix B of Army Regulation 600-8-22 shows the campaigns for Vietnam.  During his tour in Vietnam he participated in the Vietnamese Counteroffensive Phase II (1 July 1966 - 31 May 1967), Vietnamese Counteroffensive Phase III 
(1 June 1967 - 29 January 1968), and Tet Counteroffensive (30 January - 1 April 1968) campaigns.  This same regulation states that a bronze service star will be awarded for wear on the Vietnam Service Medal for participation in each campaign.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  General orders awarded him the Good Conduct Medal.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 16 January 1967 to show this award.

2.  While he contends he was injured by shrapnel when a rocket exploded nearby, unfortunately, there is no evidence in his service personnel records and he has provided no evidence which shows that he was wounded or injured as a result of hostile action, that he was treated for such wounds by medical personnel, or that such treatment was made a matter of official record.

3.  His name is not listed on the Vietnam Casualty Roster and there is no evidence that he was recommended for or awarded the Purple Heart.

4.  In the absence of evidence that he was wounded or injured as a result of hostile action, there is insufficient evidence upon which to base award of the Purple Heart.  As a result, the regulatory burden of proof necessary to support award of the Purple Heart has not been satisfied in this case.  Therefore, there is insufficient basis for adding this award to his DD Form 214 period ending 1 December 1969.

5.  General Orders awarded him the Air Medal with 1st to 16th Oak Leaf Clusters for the period 21 March 1967 to 10 December 1967.

	a.  He provided copies of flight logs for his remaining period of service in Vietnam.  Though he annotated the number of flight hours on these logs, the categories of these missions was unable to be established from the information provided.  As such, there is insufficient evidence upon which to base two additional awards of the Air Medal.

	b.  However, a DA Form 759 contained in his records shows he flew 40 combat missions, exceeding 25 hours of flight time, beyond the period covered by the aforementioned general orders.  As such, available evidence is sufficient to support one additional award of the Air Medal and correction of his DD Form 214 to show award of the Air Medal with Numeral "18."

6.  General orders awarded his unit the Meritorious Unit Commendation and Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation which are not shown on his DD Form 214.  Therefore, he is entitled to correction of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 1 December 1969 to show these unit awards.

7.  The available records show he was awarded the Vietnam Service Medal.  Additionally, evidence shows he participated in three campaigns while serving in the Republic of Vietnam.  Therefore, he is entitled to award of three bronze service stars to be affixed to his previously-awarded Vietnam Service Medal.

8.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant is entitled to have his records corrected as shown below. 

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 correction of the DD Form 214 of the individual concerned:

	a.  for the period ending 16 January 1967 by adding the Army Good Conduct Medal; and

	b.  for the period ending 1 December 1969 by adding the Army Good Conduct Medal, Air Medal with Numeral "18", Meritorious Unit Commendation, Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, and three bronze service stars for wear on the previously-awarded Vietnam Service Medal.

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 amending his DD Form 214 to show award of the Purple Heart and two additional awards 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)                                         AR20100008724



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proce