RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:			DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2014-04799
		
  						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge, be amended to include the following:

	The Senior and Master Air Crew Member Badges – administratively corrected to reflect he was awarded the Senior Air Crew Member Badge.

The Distinguished Flying Cross with Valor (DFC w/V) – administratively corrected.

An additional DFC be awarded for flying missions.  

His DFC be upgraded to the Silver Star (SS) medal.

The Air Medal with five Oak Leaf Clusters (AM w/5OLCs) - administratively corrected to award AM with one Silver OLC (AM w/1SOLC).

The Presidential Unit Citation with one Bronze Oak Leaf Cluster (PUC w/1BOLC) – Basic PUC awarded and already annotated on his DD Form 214.

The Air Force Outstanding Unit Award with three Bronze Oak Leaf Clusters (AFOUA w/3BOLC) for service with the 38th Air and Rescue Squadron (38th ARRS).

The AFOUA w/4BOLC for service while assigned to the 40th Aerospace Rescue and Recovery Wing, Detachment 1 – administratively corrected, however, not for service with the 38th ARRS.

The Air Force Overseas Ribbon-Short Tour (AFORS-S).

The Air Force Overseas Ribbon-Long Tour with two Bronze Oak Leaf Clusters (AFOSR-L w/2BOLC).

Vietnam Service Medal (VSM) – administratively corrected.

The Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm and the Vietnam Cross of Gallantry (RVNGC w/P) for his service with the 38th ARRS.

The RVNGC w/P – administratively corrected for his service with the 40th ARRW.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

It took him over 30 years to receive compensation from VA for disability and now that he is in his 80s, he has decided to pursue getting the medals that he believes he is entitled to.  By way of background, he suffered a back injury and was forced to retire after serving 22 years without disability.  He was told that he had too many years of service and could not retrain into another career field.  He notes that the Veteran Affairs (VA) claims processing became a nightmare.  Because of the VA processing issues, the thought of requesting medals turned out to be unimportant.  After serving in Vietnam, he suffered from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and was unable to work due to his mental problems and physical disabilities.  In addition, searching and gathering documents after so many years of house moving became a complicated task as he was unable to lift boxes and did not have a computer to process this form.  Primarily, he thought of the futility of expecting that this issue could be resolved. 

He provides additional documentation in support of his request to be awarded the SS, hoping to give a better perspective of what occurred on the incident leading to award of DFC.  He cannot explain how a firefighter earned an aerial award for fighting a ground fire of an airplane.  Many enlisted and officers were in doubt and thought he was a “Wanna be a hero.”  Nevertheless, he has always been proud that he was awarded an officers medal.  He has been searching for photos of the “Raid at Udom” to show that their participation was a ground action in the first part of this incident; however, the photos had been stored away for many years.  He is certain these photos were not included in the combat report.  He has listed and numbered the photos according to the sequence of events from the initial response to the following day when he went to check on the Hard Hose of the Fire Suppression Kit (FSK) and made an assessment of what had transpired.

Photo #1 Helicopter and Crew Training Fire:  Individuals had no idea what their job was and did not understand the concept of using this type of helicopter for aircraft firefighting and/or rescue.  This photo demonstrates a Training Fire with the concept of how the HH-43B Helicopter provided rotor down-wash to blow the fire and heat away from the (2) Airborne Firemen to access the aircraft cockpit and rescue the pilot.

Photo #2 Photo of C-141 Cargo Aircraft:  Copy of similar C-141 Cargo Aircraft that was parked at the north-end of the base and was attacked by a group of Sappers intending to destroy the plane and another RF-4 parked there.  He has illustrated the Left Wing Engine #2 which had taken several rounds of AK-47 tracer bullets and was engulfed in flames.  Engine #4 took a couple of bullets and had little fire.  As the bullets started flying toward them, a non-commissioned officer (NCO) grabbed the nozzle and ran towards the fire as he was pulling the hose and charged the kit.  The NCO sprayed the number (2) engine and put the fire out then moved over to the #4 engine did the same.

Photo #3 Holding the Hose with Bullet Hole:  They started pulling back with the intention of moving to the left where an Aircraft Power Unit (APU) in front of the plane was providing power and apparently took gunfire or grenade shrapnel and was engulfed in fire.  He was standing behind Sergeant B holding the Nozzle about 4-5 feet when a AK47 bullet hit right behind him and busted the fire hose, he turned around and saw the foam spewing up - at the same time he took his Crash Hood and as he held it at his side another bullet shot it out of his hand.  He dropped the hose and gave the signal to the chopper that they were out of commission; the chopper pulled back and went around to the left side. As they were pulling back a burst of intense automatic gunfire was directed toward them; he ran towards the NCO and told him to get down - we dropped on the tarmac and could hear the Pow-Pow, Ping and Zing of the bullets over us and we tried to make ourselves a small target as we could but there was no place to hide.  While laying down there was a pause of enemy fire, he turn left and saw the APU was still burning and also saw a person on the ground who told the NCO to go shut down the APU, enemy fire resumed as they both got up and ran to the unit.  He picked the NCO up and carried him away about 40 feet and checked him for wounds; he had been hit in the groin by either a bullet or shrapnel.  Another round of enemy fire was directed at them, he covered the wounded young man with his body to protect him from getting hit again.  The security forces and ambulance arrived, the young man was taken to the hospital, but died later that morning.  He provides additional photos in support of his request.

He notes in retrospect, the one thing that really made him furious was that the Command leaders did not let them wear side weapons; apparently we could not be trusted to carry arms either because we could kill each other or we were in a secure area and there was no threat for enemy action on our base. So we responded to all types of aircraft emergencies and flew unarmed even though we were combat crewmembers.  But during this incident, had one of those sappers come forward to where we were he could have killed each and every one of us as we had nothing to defend ourselves.

He wishes to add that their Pilots did an outstanding job of getting them to the scene.  He believes their entire crew served with professionalism and courage during this incident and should all be awarded the SS medal.
 
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant initially entered active duty in the Regular Air Force on 15 February 1957.  

According to Special Order (SO) G-13, dated 17 April 1967, the applicant was awarded the Basic Aircrew Member Badge (Permanent).

According to SO G-3394, dated 4 November 1968, and the applicant’s AM citation, he was awarded the AM on 28 October 1967 for superbly accomplishing a highly intricate mission to support Free World forces that were combatting aggression.  

According to SO P-50, dated 10 December 1968, the applicant was awarded the Controlled Air Force Specialty Code (CAFSC) Skill Level of 75172 (Examiner’s Note:  It appears the SO denotes the CAFSC “FROM” and “TO” in the wrong order).

According to the applicant’s DFC citation, he was awarded the DFC for heroism while participating in aerial flight as a Rescue Specialist at Udorn Royal Thai Air Force Base, Thailand on 26 July 1968.

According to SO G-2, dated 29 June 1970, after holding the principal duty assignment in a First Priority (crew member) AFSC for a period of 7 years, the applicant was awarded the Senior Air Crew member Badge – administratively corrected.

According to SO Number AC-14409, dated 8 May 1974, the applicant retired in the grade of master sergeant and was credited with 21 years, 4 months, and 16 days of active service.

Based on AFPC/DPSID’s review of the applicant's official military personnel record, they were able to determine that the medals and/or ribbons listed below should have been awarded during his service from 25 October 1952 to 30 June 1974.  AFPC/DPSOR will administratively correct the applicant’s records to reflect the following:

The DFC w/V, AM w/1SOLC, AFOUA w/V and 4BOLC, the VSM with three Bronze Service Stars (VSM w/3BSS), the Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon (SAEMR), the RVNGC w/P, and the Senior Air Crew Member Badge.

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the memorandums prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are included at Exhibits C, D, and E.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSID recommends denying upgrade of the DFC to the SS Medal.  There is no evidence in the applicant's record and the applicant did not present any to support award or justify an error or injustice exists.  In order to reasonably consider the applicant's request, he needs to submit a recommendation from someone with firsthand knowledge of the act/achievement preferably from someone within his chain of command at the time of the act/achievement, a proposed citation, and eyewitness statements.

By way of background, the SS medal is the third highest military valor decoration that can be awarded to a person serving in any capacity with the United States Armed Forces. It is the highest United States Military valor decoration that may be awarded to members of the armed forces of friendly foreign nations. The Silver Star may be awarded according to any individual while serving in any capacity with the United States Armed Forces, who distinguishes himself or herself by gallantry in action under any of the following circumstances: While engaged in an action against an enemy of the United States; while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing foreign force; while serving with friendly foreign forces engaged in an armed conflict against an opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party. The required gallantry, while of a lesser degree than that required for award of the Army Distinguished Service Cross, the Navy Cross, or the Air Force Cross, must nevertheless have been performed with marked distinction. The Silver Star medal may be awarded posthumously.

Disapproval for award of the DFC for flying missions.  In order to reasonably consider the applicant's request, he needs to submit a recommendation from someone with firsthand knowledge of the act/achievement preferably from someone within his chain of command at the time of the act/achievement, a proposed citation, and eyewitness statements.  

The DFC may be awarded to any persons who, after 6 April 1917, while serving in any capacity with the United States Armed Forces, distinguish themselves 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 comrades or from other persons in similar circumstances.  Awards will be made only to recognize single acts of heroism or extraordinary achievement and will not be made in recognition of sustained operational activities against an armed enemy.

Disapproval for award of the PUC W/1BOLC.  The applicant was awarded the PUC as annotated on his DD Form 214; however, they were unable to verify the applicant was assigned to the 38th ARRS.  As they were unable to locate official documentation verifying the applicant was assigned to the 38th ARRS, they were unable to validate his eligibility to any PUC that unit may have received.  

The PUC is awarded in the name of the President of the United States to units of the Armed Forces of the United States and cobelligerent nations for extraordinary heroism in action against an armed enemy occurring on, or after, 6 October 1941, for United States Navy and United States Marine Corps units, and on or after 7 December 1941, for United States Army units.  The unit must have displayed such gallantry, determination, and esprit de corps in accomplishing its mission under extremely difficult and hazardous conditions to have set it apart and above other units participating in the same campaign.  The degree of heroism required is the same as that which would be required for award of a Distinguished Service Cross to an individual.

Disapproval for award of the AFOUA for service with the 38th Rescue Squadron (38th RS and the 38th ARRS).  They were unable to verify the applicant was assigned or attached to either squadron; therefore, they were unable to validate the applicant's eligibility to any AFOUAs either unit may have received.  

The AFOUA is awarded by the Secretary of the Air Force to units that have distinguished themselves by exceptionally meritorious service or outstanding achievement that clearly sets the unit above and apart from similar units.  The service or achievement may be in the following: performance of exceptionally meritorious service of national or international significance, accomplishment of a specific outstanding achievement of national or international significance, combat operations against an armed enemy of the United States, or military operations involving conflict with or exposure to hostile actions by an opposing foreign force. A bronze valor device may be worn on the service ribbon when the award of the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award is made to a unit for combat or direct combat support.

Disapproval for award of the AFORS-S and the AFORS-L.  The applicant did not completed a short tour or long tour on or after 1 September 1980 as he separated from active duty in 1974, rendering him ineligible for award of the Air Force Overseas Ribbon.  Furthermore the applicant was not serving on active duty as of 6 January 1986, rendering the applicant ineligible for retroactive award of the AFORS-S and the AFORS-L.  

The AFORS-S and the AFORS-L were authorized by Chief of Staff, United States Air Force, on 12 October 1980. The ribbon was authorized to be awarded to Air Force and Air Force Reserve members credited with completion of an overseas tour on or after 1 September 1980.  Only individuals serving on active duty as of 6 January 1986 are eligible to have the Air Force Overseas Ribbon applied retroactively for completion of an overseas tour.

Disapproval for award of the RVNGC w/P for his service with the 38th ARRS.  They were unable to locate official documentation nor did the applicant provide any verifying he was awarded the Vietnam Cross of Gallantry by the Republic of Vietnam.

The RVNGC is awarded by the Republic of Vietnam to certain individuals of the United States Armed Forces for valorous combat achievement during the Vietnam War, 1 March 1961 to 28 March 1973.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPSIM recommends granting the applicant’s request to include the Senior Air Crew Member Badge on his DD Form 214.  However, they recommend denying the applicants request to wear the Master Air Crew Member Badge and its inclusion on his DD Form 214.  After reviewing the documentation provided by the applicant and his official master personnel file, the applicant's records indicate he was awarded the Senior Aircrew Member Badge per Special Order G-2 dated 29 June 1970.  However, the applicant did not provide documentation to reflect the awarding of the Master Air Crew Member Badge, nor could AFPC find evidence that this badge existed during time of applicant's service.  

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit D.

AFHRA/RS notes that without any further documentation available or provided to show that the Seventh Air Force awards and decorations board to be unjust in this case, it is the opinion of the historical researcher that the applicant’s request for his DFC award to be upgraded to the SS should be disapproved.  To second-guess the decision of the awards and decorations board, made up of individuals who were well informed of the events at Udom and across the combat theater and the standards they maintained for award recognition, after the passing of 48 years, would be a disservice to their expert opinion and for all awardees who received awards from that board.  In addition, the Seventh Air Force awards and decorations board had ample evidence and opportunity to review the awards package submitted on behalf of the entire HH-43 aircrew (including the applicant), as well as the other participants involved.  

As shown in the attached historical analysis, only one person was bestowed the SS medal for actions on that night.  Although wounded, the NCO who was awarded the SS medal fought back and killed two of the enemy and disrupted their attack while calling in reinforcements that ultimately repelled the enemy.  All other ground forces received the Bronze Star medal for their actions on that night and some received the Purple Heart.  The HH-43 helicopter crew all received the DFC.

Aerial Firemen, more commonly called Rescue Specialists, were considered to be part of an aircrew. Just like Pararescue personnel, all awards and decorations are based on the concept that an aircrew, even though required to conduct some ground operations, are awarded AM and DFC awards for actions not meeting the level of a SS medal or higher.  This case falls into the same category.  Although three of the four aircrew members were submitted for the SS for their actions on the night of 26 July 1968, the Seventh Air Force awards and decorations board, after reviewing all of the facts and actions of all of the participants who were submitted for various awards for their actions on 26 July 1968, opted to bestow the DFC on this aircrew.  To upgrade the applicant’s award to the level of the SS when his actions, while laudatory and deeply respected, do not meet the threshold of such an award, would be inconsistent to the criteria that the Seventh Air Force awards and decorations board held itself.  The Seventh Air Force awards and decorations board of 1968 had all the information and also the depth of knowledge of achievements across Thailand, Laos and Vietnam to make an informed decision on the applicable level of recognition in the applicant’s case.  

A complete copy of the AFHRA/RS evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit E.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

He responds with the following key comments in rebuttal to the advisory opinions:

The Statement or Facts states that he was attached to 40th [sic] Air and Rescue Recovery Squadron 16 January 1970 to 15 January 1971.  However, the date 15 January 1971 is incorrect, it should read 31 November 1972 - rotated to the CONUS 15 December 1972.

The researcher was unable to locate signed recommendations, proposed citations, eye witness statements or command endorsements verifying award to upgrade DFC to SS, which is correct and that is his contention that nobody notice or cared to verify what really happened while they were under intense automatic fire.  There were only two (2) eye witnesses his co-worker and the mortally wounded crew chief he held until the ambulance arrived and he cannot verify that because the crew chief died the next day.  He believes he was the last person he saw before he was sedated and probably never regained consciousness.  He contacted the NCO and asked for support to see if he would send him copies of his DFC award orders, citation and/or a statement to verify their actions on that mission.  The NCO said he lost all his orders and had no recollection of what happen after they put the fire out and separated.  

The researcher was unable to verify the applicant was attached to the 38th ARRS 1967 to 1968 and eligible for awards the 38th may have received.  However, it has been established that he was assigned to the 432nd Civil Engineering Squadron (432nd CES) and on the Part II of the AFHRS/RA advisory opinion, it verifies on page 6 that five rescue specialists were attached to Detachment 5 38th Helicopter Section for flying and training missions and does not mention he was their Non-Commissioned Officer-in-Charge (NCOIC).  He does not have copies of flight orders from base personnel that issued special orders and it is not likely that we would fly with Detachment 5 38th ARRS without authorization.
	
If he is not eligible for PUC, AFOUA, VCG awards from the 38th ARRS that was the error of the base personnel that their attached duty orders were not placed in their personal records.  

He was not aware the overseas ribbons were not initiated until 6 January 1986 and he was already out of the military service and not retroactive.

He wishes to mention that the CHCO Report Attack on Udom does not mention the actions of the Base Fire Department -responded with two (2) 0-1 l A's Crash Trucks and one (1) 1,000 gallon Water Truck.  They helped to put out the fire on right side and assisted to evacuate flight crew and received the following awards.  The Assistance Fire Chief was awarded the SS and 6 to 8 firemen received Bronze Stars.

This report will certainly bring closure to his peace of mind as to who was that dying young man he held in his arms, never knew who he was, but whose face he still sees in his dreams.   

He thanks the researcher for his diligence in the preparation and submission to his claim and he apologizes for the long delay (48) years submitting correction of his military records.  He wishes to spare the details, but after years of being 100 percent disabled with mental and physical disabilities, time kept running thru all of his old age problems.  He has always believed he was entitled to the SS based on what transpired on that date.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit G.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD:

Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice.  After a careful review of the applicant's contentions, documentation submitted in support of the request, to include his rebuttal, and the available evidence of record, we are not convinced the applicant has provided sufficient evidence for us to conclude that he is the victim of an error or injustice.  We also note the applicant did not file the application within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered, or should have been discovered, as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552 and Air Force Instruction 36-2603.  Therefore, because we do not find it would be in the interest of justice to recommend granting relief, and the applicant has offered no plausible reason for the delay in filing the application, we cannot conclude it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file the application.  Accordingly, other than that already administratively corrected, we find the application untimely.

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The application was not timely filed and it would not be in the interest of justice to waive the untimeliness.  It is the decision of the Board, therefore, to reject the application as untimely.

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-04799 in Executive Session on 21 September 2016 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-04799 was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 31 Oct 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSID, dated 1 Feb 15.
	Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 13 Apr 15.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, AFHRA/RS, dated 18 May 16, w/atchs.
	Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 May 16.
	Exhibit G.  Letter, Applicant, 16 Jun 16.

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), it is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.

1 2