PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           26 June 2003       
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2003083981

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

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Ms. Wanda L. Waller		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Chairperson	
	Mr. Lester Echols		Member	
	Mr. Lawrence Foster		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

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

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests correction of his DD Form 214 (Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show award of the Air Medal.

3.  The applicant states that he participated in numerous combat air assaults across hostile territory while serving in Vietnam.  In support of his application, he submits a VA Form 21-4138 (Statement in Support of Claim), dated 
21 November 2002, and 14 DA Forms 1594 (Daily Staff Journal or Duty Officer's Log) dated 4 June 1969 to 17 April 1970.

4.  The Veterans of Foreign Wars, as counsel for the applicant, points out that the applicant submitted 13 pages of Daily Logs in support of his claim.  Counsel concurs with the applicant's contentions. 

5.  The applicant’s military records show that he was inducted on 18 November 1968.  He served as a light weapons infantryman in Vietnam from 17 May 1969 through 21 June 1970 and was honorably released from active duty on 21 June 1970. 

6.  The applicant's DD Form 214, which was authenticated in his own hand, does not show the Air Medal as an authorized award.

7.  There are no orders for the Air Medal in the applicant's service personnel records.

8.  There are no flight hours recorded in the applicant's service personnel records.  There is also no evidence that the applicant met the qualifications for or was recommended for award of the Air Medal.

9.  In support of his claim for award of the Air Medal, the applicant provided 
DA Forms 1594 which show the applicant's unit performed 14 combat airlift and combat assault operations during the period 4 June 1969 to 17 April 1970.    

10.  The applicant's DD Form 214 shows the Vietnam Service Medal as an authorized award.  His records show that he participated in four campaigns during his assignment in Vietnam.

11.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) lists the unit awards received by units serving in Vietnam.  This document shows the unit, to which the applicant was assigned, was cited for award of the Meritorious Unit Commendation for actions during the period 1 January 1969 to 31 August 1969 by Department of the Army General Orders Number 53, dated 1970.  This award is not shown on his DD Form 214.

12.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) shows the applicant is entitled to award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation based on Department of the Army General Orders Number 42, dated 1972.  This award is not shown on his DD Form 214.

13.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part, that the Air Medal 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.

14.  U.S. Army Vietnam (USARV) Regulation 672-1 (Decorations and Awards) provided, in pertinent part, guidelines for award of the Air Medal.  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.  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 Air Medal.  However, the regulation was clear that these guidelines were considered only a departure point.  Nothing created an entitlement to the award.  

15.  Army Regulation 600-8-22, in pertinent part, authorizes award of a bronze service star, based on qualifying service, for each campaign listed in Appendix B of this regulation and states that authorized bronze service stars will be worn on the appropriate service medal.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Board considered the applicant's contention that he participated in numerous combat air assaults across hostile territory while serving in Vietnam

2.  The Board also reviewed the DA Forms 1594 provided by the applicant in support of his claim for award of the Air Medal.  

3.  Notwithstanding the DA Forms 1594 which show the applicant's unit performed 14 combat airlift and combat assault operations, the governing awards regulation in effect at the time states that 25 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 Air Medal.  Therefore, the Board determined that there is insufficient evidence on which to base an award of the Air Medal in this case.

4.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 shows the Vietnam Service Medal as an authorized award.  However, evidence of record shows the applicant participated in four campaigns during his assignment in Vietnam which are not correctly shown by award of four bronze service stars for wear on his Vietnam Service Medal.  Therefore, in accordance with the governing regulation, the applicant is entitled to the Vietnam Service Medal with four bronze service stars and correction of his DD Form 214 to show these awards.   
  
5.  The applicant's unit received the Meritorious Unit Commendation and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation while he was assigned to it.  Therefore, the applicant is entitled to correction of his DD Form 214 to show these unit awards.
 
6.  In view of the foregoing findings and conclusions, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant’s records, but only as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was awarded the Vietnam Service Medal with four bronze service stars, the Meritorious Unit Commendation and the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation.

2.  That so much of the application as pertains to award of the Air Medal be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

WTM___  LE_____  LF_______  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		__Walter T. Morrison__
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2003083981	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20030626	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	 	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	107.0018	
2.	107.0000	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.