ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:  15 August 2019

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20170009668


APPLICANT REQUESTS:  in effect, to receive orders for his award of the Distinguished Flying Cross and update of his DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) to reflect the award.

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 

* DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)
* Newspaper Clipping – Gunner’s Aerial Tactics Save Lives
* Photos of Ceremony
* Statement from X – pilot of cover ship
* Statement from X – pilot that was wounded

FACTS:

1.  The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, United States Code (USC), section 1552 (b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 

2.  The applicant states he would like to receive orders for his award of the Distinguished Flying Cross and update his DD Form 214 showing the award.  The orders never made it out of Vietnam and he has been trying to have it corrected since he separated from the Army.

3.  The applicant provides:

	a.  A newspaper clipping, “Gunner’s aerial tactics save lives,” which provides a detailed account of events:

* a bullet passed through the floor of the scout chopper from enemy ground fire below, hitting the pilot’s right leg, the instrument panel, and punctured the windshield
* the pilot stated the applicant, his door-gunner, was to credit for not losing control of the chopper and losing it all
* the applicant made his way to the front of the chopper within 15 seconds and jumped in the copilot’s seat to assist the pilot, who could not operate the pedals due to his injury
* the applicant had some training on flying choppers and was able to navigate a landing 

b.  Photos of a ceremony show the applicant being recognized for his efforts.

	c.  A witness statement from Colonel (Retired) X noted:

* on the morning of 27 July 1971, he was flying gun cover for the applicant’s pilot, Warrant Officer (WO1) X and his crew chief (the applicant)
* he rolled in to assist WO1 X when he heard him shout “taking fire” and could see that both he and the aircraft had been hit
* although the aircraft was initially acting erratically, it regained some semblance of control
* he flew down as close as he could get the aircraft and was amazed to see the applicant climbing into the copilot seat, a difficult task for someone moving in a damaged aircraft
* he believes they were able to get one of the radios to work and communicate with the applicant to assist him in controlling the anti-torque pedals
* he states that had it not been for the applicant risking his to assist his pilot, they would have crashed and he should be credited with saving his pilot’s life
* he also saved the Government the cost of a new aircraft

d.  A witness statement from Colonel (Retired) X noted:

* he wholeheartedly endorses the applicant receive the Distinguished Flying Cross he received in Bearcat, South Vietnam in 1971
* due to the constant state of flux and repositioning of units in South Vietnam, he is convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the award’s paperwork never made it to the applicant’s DD Form 214 when he departed the service
* he was a warrant officer at the time and the applicant was part of his team
* on a reconnaissance mission, when approximately 40 feet about the trees they confirmed the presence of enemy troops and opened fire on each other
* they received a heavy volume of fire and rounds impacted the right wind screen, knocking it out
* the rounds also impacted their radios and one went through his right knee and the right side of the armor seat and main rotor
* the aircraft started spinning and they were losing altitude heading into a large tree when he heard the applicant tell him “do not crash, Sir” and he immediately applied collective control
* they skimmed the top of the trees and he could not gain full control when the applicant jumped into the left seat and began controlling both anti-torque pedals
* he fully credits the applicant for their survival and is convinced he would not have a fully functioning knee had it not been for his immediate actions and remaining cool under fire
* he states the applicant is a “Soldier’s Soldier” and he would fight to have him in his unit

4.  A review of the applicant’s service record shows:

a. He enlisted in the Regular Army on 31 March 1970.

   b.  He served in Vietnam from 13 September 1970 to 12 September 1971.   He was assigned to Headquarters & Headquarters Company, 3rd Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division (Airmobile) as an 11B (Light Weapon Infantryman).  He also served in Germany from 12 October 1973 to 11 January 1976.

	c.  He was honorably released from active duty on 15 May 1978.  His DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from Active Duty) shows he completed 8 years, 1 month, and 15 days of total active service.  It also shows he was awarded or authorized:

* National Defense Service Medal
* Army Commendation Medal
* Air Medal
* Bronze Star Medal
* Vietnam Service Medal with two bronze service stars
* Vietnam Campaign Medal with 60 Device
* Army Good Conduct Medal
* Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar

4.  On 18 August 2017, U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC), Awards and Decorations Branch, notified the applicant’s congressional representative that they were unable to verify his entitlement to the Distinguished Flying Cross.  HRC could not locate orders authorizing the award, but did provide orders for various awards in his records for his reference.  Additionally, HRC provided the Cold War Recognition Certificate, but noted it is not an authorized entry for the DD Form 214.

5.  A review of the applicant’s record confirms he is eligible for awards that are not recorded on his DD Form 214.  These awards will be added to his DD Form 214 as administrative corrections and will not be considered by the Board.  The Board will consider award of the Distinguished Flying Cross.

6.  By regulation, the Distinguished Flying Cross is awarded to any person who, while serving in any capacity with the Army, distinguishes himself or herself by heroism or extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight.  As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required.

7.  By law and regulation, except for award recommendations submitted in accordance with the provisions of Section 1130, Title 10, United States Code (10 USC 1130), each recommendation for an award of a military decoration must be entered administratively into military channels within 2 years of the act, achievement, or service to be honored.  An award recommendation will be considered to have been submitted into military channels when it has been signed by the initiating officer and endorsed by a higher official in the chain of command.  However, pursuant to 10 USC 1130, a Member of Congress can request consideration of a proposal for the award or presentation of decoration, either for an individual or unit that is not otherwise authorized to be presented or awarded due to limitations established by law or policy.  

BOARD DISCUSSION:

After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board determined that relief was not warranted.  Based upon the documentary evidence provided by the applicant and found within the military service record, the Board concluded there was insufficient evidence to show that the applicant was ever awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross.

Prior to closing the case, the Board did note the administrative note below from the analyst of record and recommended that change be completed to more accurately reflect the military service of the applicant.

BOARD VOTE:
Mbr 1	Mbr 2	Mbr 3

:	:	:	GRANT FULL RELIEF

:	:	:	GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

:	:	:	GRANT FORMAL HEARING

X	X	X	DENY APPLICATION


BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.
2.  Prior to closing the case, the Board did note the administrative note below from the analyst of record and recommended that change be completed to more accurately reflect the military service of the applicant.
	 
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.

ADMINISTRATIVE NOTES:

Department of the Army General Orders (DAGO) Number 54, dated 1974, awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm to Headquarters & Headquarters Company, 3d Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division, for service in Vietnam for the period of 17 September 1965 to June 1972.




REFERENCES:

1.  Title 10, USC, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within three 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 three-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.

2.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-3 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register), published to assist commanders and personnel officers in determining or establishing the eligibility of individual members for campaign participation credit, assault landing credit, and unit citation badges awarded during the Vietnam Conflict, the Grenada Operation, and the period of service subsequent to the Vietnam Conflict up to September 1987.   Department of the Army General Orders (DAGO) Number 54, dated 1974, awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm to Headquarters & Headquarters Company, 3d Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division, for service in Vietnam for the period of 17 September 1965 to June 1972.

3.  Army Regulation (AR) 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides Army policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning individual military decorations.

	a.  The Distinguished Flying Cross is awarded to any person who, while serving in any capacity with the Army, distinguishes himself or herself 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 his or her comrades or from other persons in similar circumstances.  As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command, and announcement in orders are required.

   b.  Paragraph 1-14, states except for award recommendations submitted in accordance with the provisions of Section 1130, Title 10, United States Code (10 USC 1130), which is outlined below, each recommendation for an award of a military decoration must be entered administratively into military channels within 2 years of the act, achievement, or service to be honored.  An award recommendation will be considered to have been submitted into military channels when it has been signed by the initiating officer and endorsed by a higher official in the chain of command.  However, pursuant to 10 USC 1130, a Member of Congress can request consideration of a proposal for the award or presentation of decoration (or the upgrading of a decoration), either for an individual or unit, that is not otherwise authorized to be presented or awarded due to limitations established by law or policy.  Based upon such review, the Secretary of the Army will make a determination as to the merit of approving the award or presentation of the decoration and other determinations necessary to comply with congressional reporting requirements under 10 USC 1130.

	c.  Title 10 USC 1130 allows the Service Secretary concerned to review a proposal for the award of, or upgrading of, a decoration that is otherwise precluded from consideration by limitations established by law or policy.  A request for an award (or upgrade of an award) under 10 USC 1130 requires submission of a completed DA Form 638 (Recommendation for Award); a narrative of the actions or period for which recognition is requested; and sworn affidavits, eyewitness statements, certificates and related documents.  Commanders, leaders, and fellow Soldiers who had personal (i.e., eyewitness) knowledge of the circumstances and events relative to the request are the best sources of corroborating evidence.  Title 10 USC 1130 requires that a request of this nature be referred to the Service Secretary from a Member of Congress.   

//NOTHING FOLLOWS//

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)	 AR20170009668


5


1