MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           1 April 2003
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002080751

	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.

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Hubert S. Shaw, Jr.		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Arthur A. Omartian		Chairperson	
	Mr. Thomas B. Redfern		Member	
	Mr. Thomas E. O'Shaughnessy, Jr.		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 records to show award of the Air Medal and to show marksmanship qualification badges for the M-14 Rifle, the   M-16 Rifle and the M-60 Machinegun.

APPLICANT STATES:  That, during basic training, he was trained to use the 
M-14 Rifle and the M-16 Rifle and he qualified not lower than "Sharpshooter" with these weapons.  The applicant also stated that, during Advanced Individual Training, he was trained on the M-60 Machinegun and qualified "Expert" with this weapon.  In support of his application, he provided a copy of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge), a copy of his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record), and a copy of orders discharging him from the U.S. Army Reserve effective 1 March 1973.

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

The applicant entered active duty on 14 March 1967.  He completed training as a light weapons infantryman and served in Vietnam from 3 December 1967 through 29 November 1968.  The applicant was honorably separated from active duty on temporary records on 13 March 1970.  

Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant’s DD Form 214 does not show award of the Air Medal or marksmanship qualification badges for the 
M-14 Rifle, the M-16 Rifle and the M-60 Machinegun.

The applicant’s service personnel records do not contain a recommendation or orders for award of the Air Medal.  Item 41 (Awards and Decorations) of his DA Form 20 contains the entry, “Air Medal” but shows the entry, “unk” [unknown] under the column for the award authority.

The applicant’s records do not contain orders awarding him marksmanship qualification badges for the M-14 Rifle, the M-16 Rifle and the M-60 Machinegun. His DA Form 20 does not show an entry in item 29 (Qualification In Arms) or in item 41 indicating marksmanship qualification or award of a marksmanship badge.

Army Regulation 600-8-22 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.

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 and that nothing created an entitlement to the award.  

Army Regulation 600-8-22, in pertinent part, sets forth requirements for award of basic marksmanship qualification badges.  The qualification badge is awarded to indicate the degree in which an individual has qualified in a prescribed record course, and an appropriate bar is furnished to denote each weapon with which the individual has qualified.  The qualification badges are in three classes:  Expert, Sharpshooter, and Marksman.

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.  There is no evidence the applicant was recommended for or was awarded the Air Medal.  There also are no flight records showing that the applicant completed the flight hours or missions required for award of the Air Medal.  In the absence of evidence which shows that the applicant met the qualifications and was recommended for award of the Air Medal, there is insufficient basis for correction of the applicant’s records to show that he was awarded the Air Medal.

2.  There are no orders showing the applicant completed weapons’ qualification and/or was awarded marksmanship qualification badges for the M-14 Rifle, the   M-16 Rifle and the M-60 Machinegun.  The Board does not doubt that the applicant qualified on a military weapon during Basic Combat Training.  However, in the absence of orders specifying the level of qualification and/or the marksmanship qualification badge awarded to the applicant, there is insufficient basis for correction of the applicant’s records to show that he was awarded the marksmanship qualification badges which he has requested.

3.  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 this requirement.

4.  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

__TEO__  __TBR___  __AAO__  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002080751	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20030401	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	MR CHUN	
ISSUES         1.	107.0000.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.