IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 19 November 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150003512 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 show the Air Medal (AM) (3rd Award) and that his previously awarded Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) with "V" Device be upgraded to a Silver Star. 2. The applicant states the AM justification could be made from after action reports and day reports of Company A, 3rd Battalion, 22nd Infantry, 25th Infantry Division from the period August 1969 through August 1970. The Silver Star is justified because all of the officers in the unit were killed in action or wounded on 20 February 1970, and they could not recommend for award of the Silver Star. A fellow squad leader recommended him for the Silver Star; however, only the ARCOM could be given. 3. The applicant provides: * orders * DD Form 214 * DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214) 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 has requested an upgrade of his ARCOM with "V" Device to a Silver Star. This request was addressed in Army Board for Correction of Military Records Docket Number AR20100007237 on 16 August 2010. This request was denied because there was no recommendation for award available to provide information as to the actual nature of the recommended award or whether the ARCOM with "V" Device was approved as a downgraded award or an interim award pending further review of his heroic actions. No new information related to the ARCOM with "V" Device has been provided with the current application. Based on this information, the portion of the applicant’s request pertaining to an upgrade of his ARCOM with "V" Device will not be discussed any further in this Record of Proceedings. 3. General Orders 1490, issued by Headquarters, 25th Infantry Division, dated 8 February 1970, awarded him the basic AM for meritorious achievement while participating in aerial flight from 8 November 1969 to 11 December 1969. 4. The applicant's military records show he was inducted into the Army of the United States on 11 March 1969. He served in the Republic of Vietnam (RVN) from 26 August 1969 to 23 August 1970 and was assigned to Company A, 3rd Battalion, 22nd Infantry, 25th Infantry Division. He was honorably released from active duty on 30 December 1970. 5. Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant's DD Form 214 (as amended by a DD Form 215) shows the following: * National Defense Service Medal * Vietnam Service Medal with four bronze service stars * Combat Infantryman Badge * RVN Campaign Medal with Device (1960) * Silver Star * ARCOM (2nd Award) with "V" Device * Bronze Star Medal * Air Medal * Army Good Conduct Medal * Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-16) * RVN Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation * RVN Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation 6. Aside from the general orders awarding the applicant the basic AM, 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 additional orders for award of the AM pertaining to the applicant. 7. The applicant states award of the AM (3rd Award) could be justified from after action reports and day reports from Company A, 3rd Battalion, 22nd Infantry, 25th Infantry Division from the period August 1969 through August 1970; however, these reports were not found in the available records and the applicant did not provide these reports or any specific flight hours. 8. 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. 9. U.S. Army Vietnam (USARV) Regulation 672-1 (Decorations and Awards) provided, in pertinent part, 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. 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. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's contentions regarding his entitlement to award of the AM (3rd Award) was carefully considered. 2. GO awarded him the basic AM for meritorious achievement while participating in aerial flight from 8 November 1969 to 11 December 1969. 3. His service record does not contain any record of his specific flight hours or orders for award of the AM (3rd Award) or any additional awards of the AM. 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) AR20150003512 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150003512 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1