IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  10 February 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140011550


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 award or reissuance of the Air Medal (AM).

2.  The applicant states:

   a.  He was given the AM at the time of his discharge and although he noticed it was not listed on his DD Form 214, he said nothing as he didn't want to risk any delay to correct his record and because it was not important to him at that time.
   
   b.  He served as a "scout dog handler" and "door gunner" in Vietnam attached to a tracker team exclusively deploying by helicopter on a moment's notice.
   
   c.  He served most of his Vietnam tour aboard helicopters, not only as a passenger but as a crewmember looking for, watching, and returning fire on the enemy.

3.  The applicant provides:

* self-authored statement
* witness statement
* DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge)
* Honorable Discharge Certificate
* News Article titled "Dogman"
* Privacy Release Statement

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 records show he was inducted into the Army of the United States on 7 August 1969.  He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman).

3.  He served in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) from 8 October 1970 through 31 July 1971, while assigned with the 63rd Infantry Platoon Combat Trackers (IPCT).  His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) confirms he performed the duty of a dog handler during his RVN tour.

4.  His official military personnel file does not include an order or any other documents to show he was ever awarded or recommended for award of the AM. It is also void any flight record documents.

5.  On 1 August 1971, the applicant was honorably released from active duty.

6.  His DD Form 214 shows he earned the following awards during his tenure on active duty:

* Bronze Star Medal (2nd Award)
* National Defense Service Medal
* Vietnam Service Medal 
* RVN Campaign Medal
* Combat Infantryman Badge
* Overseas Service Bar
* Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with two Rifle Bars

7.  The applicant provides a witness statement from an individual who supports his request for award of the AM and indicates:

* he was the unit training non-commissioned officer of the 63rd IPCT during the applicant's RVN tour
* the applicant was assigned as a dog handler exclusively deploying with his team by helicopter
* in many instances, their missions resulted from firefights
* the tracker teams flew in to locate tracks left by the enemy and to reestablish contact with the hostile force
* the tracker team served in a "non-crewmember" flying status and required its Soldiers to participate in aerial flight on a regular and frequent basis in the performance of their primary duties

8.  The Awards and Decorations Computer Assisted Retrieval System 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 AM orders for the applicant.

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) 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.

10.  U.S. Army Vietnam (USARV) Regulation 672-1 (Decorations and Awards) provided guidelines for award of the AM.  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.

	a.  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.  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.  Because 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.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  There are no general orders available that show the applicant was awarded the AM.  The governing regulation requires a formal recommendation, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders for award of the AM.  In the absence of orders or other independent evidence that would confirm he completed the number of missions necessary to be awarded the AM, the evidence he provides is not sufficient to correct his record to show award of the AM.

2.  In view of the above, the applicant's request should be denied.

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)                                         AR20140011550





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140011550



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1