BOARD DATE: 15 January 2013
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120011602
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 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to add the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC).
2. The applicant states he was assigned to the 128th Assault Helicopter Company in Vietnam. During this assignment he served as an aircraft commander of an aircraft with tail number UH-1H 69-15270. While on a mission, his aircraft took intense enemy fire resulting in casualties. The radios were lost and the aircraft was losing massive amounts of oil from the engine and transmission fluid. Despite the loss of the radios and the damage to the aircraft they managed to fly to the nearest evacuation hospital. As a result of this action he was nominated for award of the DFC in July 1971. Additionally, his company commander informed him he would receive this award before he returned to the United States.
3. The applicant provides a copy of a web page, dated 6 June 2012.
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 applicants 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 applicants failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.
2. After having had previous enlisted service the applicant was appointed as a U.S. Army Reserve Commissioned officer on 15 August 1968 and entered active duty. He held military occupational specialty 1981 (Rotary Wing Aviation Unit Commander).
3. His DA Form 66 (Officer Qualification Record) shows he was assigned in Vietnam from 29 July 1970 to 29 July 1971 and he served with the 195th Aviation Company (Assault Helicopter) from 1 August to 10 November 1970. He served with the 128th Aviation Company (Assault Helicopter), 11th Aviation Battalion (Combat), Vietnam from 15 November 1970 to 24 July 1971.
4. His record contains no evidence of a recommendation or orders for the DFC.
5. He was honorably released from active duty on 20 August 1972. His
DD Form 214 shows he completed 4 years and 6 days of net active service,
1 year and 1 day of which was credited as foreign service in Vietnam. This form and his DD Form 215 (Correction to the DD Form 214) show he was awarded the:
* Purple Heart
* Air Medal with V Device with Numeral 36
* National Defense Service Medal
* Army Aviator Badge
* Vietnam Service Medal with two bronze service stars
* Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with Device 1960
* Bronze Star Medal
* 2 Overseas Service Bars
6. He provided a copy of a web page containing information regarding the aircraft on which he flew in Vietnam.
7. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states the Distinguished Flying Cross is awarded to any person who, while serving in any capacity with the Army, distinguishes himself or herself by heroism or extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight. The performance of the act of heroism must be evidenced by voluntary action above and beyond the call of duty. The extraordinary achievement must have resulted in an accomplishment so exceptional and outstanding as to clearly set the individual apart from his or her comrades or from other persons in similar circumstances. As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. Award of the DFC requires a formal recommendation, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders. The applicant has provided no evidence nor is there evidence in his record to show he was recommended for or received orders for award of the DFC.
2. Based on the foregoing, there is insufficient evidence to grant relief in this case.
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) AR20120011602
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20120011602
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090004517
The applicant served as a crew chief/gunner on one UH-1 during the operation and, despite being wounded, he continued with the mission, helping to return his aircraft to base. Given the awarding of Air Medals with V Devices to several other enlisted aircraft crewmembers for their actions on 24 March 1971, it would be just and equitable to award the applicant the same decoration. As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to award of the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090021777
Counsel also states the applicant and this warrant officer were both involved in the same action on the night of 6 November 1965. The DA Form 638 and statement submitted in support of award of the DFC for CW4 K _ _ _ _ _ stated as the A/C of a UH-1D Helicopter flying lead of a flight of three returning from an earlier day-long mission when they received an emergency radio call advising that a cavalry unit was under nearly overwhelming enemy fire. In a letter, dated 16 October 2009, the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080015845
h. In a 4 October 2005 statement, retired LTC U____ states that he was the battalion commander at the time. Now retired COL H. M____ states that he was the company's awards officer and that the applicant was recommended for the DFC for Operation Halfback. While it is reasonable to conclude from the available evidence that the applicant was recommended for award of the DFC, there is no "conclusive evidence" of the loss of the recommendation or the failure to act on the recommendation...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100010783
The applicant provides a 13 August 2008 letter from a retired Army lieutenant colonel who was assigned to the applicant's unit in Vietnam and participated in the action for which the DFC was awarded. The applicant states he was awarded the DFC for his actions on 30 March 1969, but it wasn't included on his DD Form 214. The retired lieutenant colonel's interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System (iPERMS) record contains GO Number 3517 and his retirement DD Form 214 shows the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110005448
In a letter to the applicant, dated 19 October 2010, Chief, Military Awards Branch, HRC, stated on 26 August 2009, the Commanding General, HRC, disapproved forwarding the recommendation to the Senior Army Decorations Board and affirmed that the previously awarded Distinguished Flying Cross was the appropriate award for his action. A letter to LTC B_____, dated 22 February 2011, from the Army Review Board Agency stated that in order to initiate a review of the applicant's military records...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | AR20140006210
The applicant submitted a request for an upgrade of his award of the DFC to the Medal of Honor. d. A letter, dated 5 October 2011, wherein a Member of Congress requested the Secretary of the Army personally review a case involving a constituent who clearly met the Army's criteria for being awarded the Medal of Honor for his brave actions that save Soldiers' lives during intense combat in South Vietnam in May 1967. e. A letter, dated 3 January 2012, wherein the Secretary of the Army advised...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150001250
The applicant states the DFC he was awarded for action in the A Shau Valley in Vietnam should be upgraded to the DSC. He provides: * USARV Form 157-R (Recommendation for Decoration for Valor or Merit) * Proposed Citation for the DFC * General Orders for the DFC, dated 9 July 1969 * DFC Award Certificate * DFC Award Citation * General Orders for the DFC for the co-pilot of the aircraft * Information paper, subject: A Shau Valley-Private First Class (PFC), by J___ F__ * five letters of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110009590
At the time of the applicant's service, the Aviation Badge was called the Aircraft Crewman Badge and would not have been abbreviated as shown on his DD Form 214. NPRC improperly changed the applicant's Army Aviator Badge ["ArAvBad" as shown on his DD Form 214] to the Aviation Badge. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. voiding the 28 January 2004 DD Form 215; b. deleting the entire award entries from item...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090008640
He adds that when his recommendation for the Soldier's Medal was downgraded to an ARCOM with "V" Device, awarding him the DFC had been discussed. The local awards board recommended approval but one awards board member recommended that the award be downgraded to an Air Medal with "V" Device. The Awards Board concluded that there was insufficient evidence to award the applicant the Purple Heart and recommended that he contact the National Personnel Records Center to obtain his unit's morning...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100028031
7. 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 United States Army Human Resources Command, failed to reveal any orders for the Silver Star, subsequent awards of the Air Medal, or the DFC or DFC with First Oak Leaf Cluster pertaining to the applicant. However, there are no orders for any subsequent awards of the Air Medal in the...