MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:     

	BOARD DATE:           2 February 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999027515

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Ms. Beverly A. Young		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Calvin M. Fowler		Chairperson	
	Mr. James E. Anderholm		Member	
	Mr. Lester Echols		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  Correction of his DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show award of the Bronze Star Medal (BSM) and the “Crewman’s Badge” (correctly known as the Aircraft Crew Member Badge).

APPLICANT STATES:  That he was recommended for a BSM.  He states that he was given a copy of the paperwork by the office clerk when he left the Lieutenant’s office.  He also states that when he received his 201 file, there was no evidence of his award and he noticed that he received a crewman’s badge in Vietnam.  Further, he states that he flew 90 missions in a “bird dog” observation plane with the 223rd Combat Support Aviation Battalion.  In support of his application, he submits photocopies of his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record), his DD Form 214, a proposed citation for the BSM and a VA Form 21-4138 (Statement in Support of Claim), dated 21 April 1999.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

The applicant was inducted on 19 October 1966, completed training as a military policeman and was assigned to Vietnam from 31 October 1967 to 10 October 1968.  He was honorably released from active duty on 11 October 1968.

The applicant’s DD Form 214 does not show the BSM or the Aircraft Crew Member Badge as authorized awards.

The applicant provided a copy of a proposed citation for award of the BSM for meritorious service during the period 4 November 1967 to 18 October 1968.

General Orders in the applicant’s personnel records show that he was awarded the Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) for service in Vietnam for the period November 1967 to October 1968.  

There are no orders in the applicant’s records which awarded him the Aircraft Crew Member Badge.  His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows in item 41 (Awards and Decorations) the entry “Crewmans Badge”; however, there is no entry of the orders authorizing temporary or permanent award of this badge. There is no evidence the applicant completed training in military occupational specialty (MOS) 67 series or performed aviation related duties.  The applicant’s DA Form 20 shows in item 38 (Record of Assignments) that he served as a military policeman in MOS 95B20 during his entire assignment in Vietnam. 
Paragraph 1-18 of Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states that only one decoration will be awarded to an individual for the same act, achievement, or period of meritorious service.

Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that the Bronze Star Medal is awarded in time of war for heroism and for meritorious achievement or service. As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required. 

Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides that the Army Commendation Medal may be awarded to any member of the Armed Forces of the United States who, while serving in any capacity with the Army after 6 December 1941, distinguished himself or herself by heroism, meritorious achievement or meritorious service.  

Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in paragraph 3-1c, that the decision to award an individual a decoration and the decision as to which award is appropriate are both subjective decisions made by the commander having award approval authority.

The Army Regulation governing military awards at the time in question provided for temporary and permanent award of the Aircraft Crew Member Badge.  The regulation authorized the commander of any unit with Army aircraft assigned to publish orders allowing qualified members of that command to wear the Aircraft Crewman Badge.  To be eligible for temporary award of the Aircraft Crew Member Badge an individual had to be on flying status as a crew chief in the case of crew chiefs, electronic sensor system operators, and flight engineers or as a non-crewmember in the case of observers, medical aidmen, gunners, aircraft maintenance supervisors, or technical inspectors.  The regulation also required individuals to be qualified based on a Class III physical examination, and to hold a principal duty assignment as a crew chief, flight engineer, aircraft maintenance supervisor, observer, gunner, or technical inspector.  These personnel are authorized to wear the badge until relieved from these duties or fulfilled the mandatory requirements for permanent award of the badge.  For permanent award of the Aircraft Crew Member Badge, an individual must have performed in one of the duties specified above for not less than 12 months (not necessarily consecutive) or must have been school trained for a principal duty specified above.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that the Aircraft Crew Member Badge may be permanently awarded for successful completion of formal AIT in career management field 67 MOS’s.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  The Board noted the proposed citation for the BSM for service in Vietnam.  However, orders show that the applicant was awarded the ARCOM for his service in Vietnam.

2.  In view of the foregoing, it is clear that the award approving authority determined that the ARCOM was the appropriate level of recognition for the applicant’s service in Vietnam.

3.  There is no compelling evidence showing that the award process in this case was flawed or was improper.  The applicant has not provided compelling evidence which shows that his service was so meritorious as to warrant a higher award than the ARCOM.  The evidence shows that the appropriate award authority determined the ARCOM was the proper award in this case.  Therefore, the Board determined that there is no basis for upgrading the applicant’s award of the ARCOM to the BSM.  Further, in view of award of the ARCOM for service to the applicant, he is not entitled to award of the BSM for service during the period November 1967 to October 1968.

4.  There are no orders awarding the applicant the Aircraft Crew Member Badge for temporary or permanent wear.  There is no evidence available to the Board that the applicant was assigned to an aviation crew member position or awarded a MOS in the 67 series.  In addition, there are no flight records which show an aviation related assignment or flight hours.  Therefore, he is not entitled to award of the Aircraft Crew Member Badge.

5.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

6.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

CMF____  JEA_____  LE______  DENY APPLICATION

Karl F. Schneider
Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999027515	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20000202 	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.