BOARD DATE:	  18 January 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100017421


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 Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show award of the Air Medal (AM).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, he took part in numerous airmobile operations during his service in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) and qualified for award of the AM on numerous occasions.  

3.  The applicant provides:

* DD Form 214
* Third-party letter from his former Platoon Leader in the RVN attesting to his eligibility for award of the AM
* Combat After-Action Interview, dated 14 February 1969, detailing his unit's combat operations during the period 27-29 January 1969 (10 pages)
* extract of Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) denoting criteria for award of the AM 

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 record shows he was inducted into the Army of the United States, for a period of two years, on 29 May 1968.  He completed basic combat and advanced individual training and he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman).

3.  He served in the RVN from 4 November 1968 to 24 October 1969 and he was assigned to Company A, 3rd Battalion, 7th Infantry Regiment, 199th Infantry Brigade.  

4.  On 28 May 1970, he was honorably released from active duty at the expiration of his term of service and transferred to the United States Army Reserve Control Group to complete his remaining service obligation.

5.  Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of his DD Form 214 shows the:

* National Defense Service Medal
* Combat Infantryman Badge
* Vietnam Service Medal
* Army Commendation Medal with 1st Oak Leaf Cluster
* Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device (1960)
* Sharpshooter Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-14)
* Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Machinegun Bar (M-60)
* Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16)

6.  There is no documentation in the available records to indicate he was previously awarded the AM. 

7.  A review of the Awards and Decorations Computer Assisted Retrieval System (ADCARS), an index of general orders issued during the Vietnam era between 1965 and 1973 maintained by the Military Awards Branch of the U.S. Army Human Resources Command, failed to reveal any orders for the AM.

8.  He provides a third-party letter from Colonel (COL) (Retired) A_____ W_____, his former Platoon Leader in RVN, attesting to his eligibility for award of the AM.  COL W_____ states that his platoon, of which the applicant was a member, completed numerous airmobile operations during his time with the unit.  He further states that he, and other members of the platoon, received the AM for missions the applicant participated in.

9.  He also provides a Combat After-Action Interview, dated 14 February 1969, detailing his unit's combat operations during the period 27-29 January 1969.

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 states the AM 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 are required.

	a.  U.S. Army Vietnam (USARV) Regulation 672-1 (Decorations and Awards) provided guidelines for award of the AM.  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 AM.  However, the regulation was clear that these guidelines were considered only a departure point.  

	b.  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.

	c.  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 times and adjust it to a common denominator.

11.  Title 10 of the U.S. Code, section 1130 (10 USC 1130) provides the legal authority for consideration of proposals for decorations not previously submitted in a timely fashion.  Upon the request of a Member of Congress, the Secretary concerned shall review a proposal for the award of or upgrading of a decoration.  Based upon such review, the Secretary shall determine the merits of approving the award.  

12.  The request, with a DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award), must be submitted through a Member of Congress to:  Commander, U.S. Army Human Resources Command, ATTN:  AHRC-PDP-A, 1600 Spearhead Division Avenue, Fort Knox, KY  40122.  The unit must be clearly identified, along with the period of assignment and the recommended award.  A narrative of the actions or period for which recognition is being requested must accompany the DA Form 638.  Requests should be supported by sworn affidavits, eyewitness statements, certificates, and related documents.  Supporting evidence is best provided by commanders, leaders, and fellow Soldiers who had personal knowledge of the facts relative to the request.  The burden and costs for researching and assembling supporting documentation rest with the applicant.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  There is no documentation in the available records to indicate he was previously awarded the AM.  The governing Army Regulation requires formal recommendation, approval through the chain of command, and announcement by orders for award of the AM.  In the absence of orders, there is insufficient evidence to correct his records to show the AM. 

2.  Furthermore, during the Vietnam conflict, in order 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.  Neither the third-party letter, nor the Combat After-Action Interview that was provided detail the total number of flight missions he participated in.  Absent such information, there is insufficient evidence to correct his records to show the AM. 

3.  Nevertheless, while the available evidence is insufficient for awarding him the AM, this in no way affects his right to pursue his claim 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

____x____  ___x_____  _____x___  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.



      _______ _  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)                                         AR20100015543



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100017421



5


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1