ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 23 April 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20170014908 APPLICANT REQUESTS: correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show: * Air Medal with 24th Oak Leaf Cluster * Air Medal for Valor APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * Three Air Medal Certificates 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 that his DD Form 214 should show that he received the Air Medal with 24th oak leaf cluster and the Air Medal with Valor. He states that he cannot receive his medals without his DD Form 214 being corrected. He also states that he was in combat and would like for his records to reflect that. 3. The applicant provides: a. Air Medal Certificate, dated 18 July 1969 for meritorious achievement while participating in aerial flight in the Republic of Vietnam from 3 October 1968 to 14 October 1968. b. Air Medal Certificate, dated 29 September 1969 for meritorious achievement while participating in aerial flight in the Republic of Vietnam from 15 October 1968 to 22 August 1969. a. c. Air Medal Certificate, dated 17 October 1969 for heroism while participating in aerial flight in the Republic of Vietnam on 6 August 1969. 4. A review of the applicant’s service records shows the following: a. He enlisted in the Regular Army on 15 May 1967. b. He served in Vietnam from 16 September 1968 to 7 September 1969. He was assigned to 119th Aviation Company. c. His DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows his conduct and efficiency ratings as excellent. Additionally, his record is void of a trial by courts-martial. d. Special Order (SO) Number 154, dated 13 July 1969, awarded him the Marksman Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar (M-14). e. SO Number 122, dated 2 May 1969, awarded him the Aircraft Crewman Badge. f. General Orders (GO) Number 3605, dated 28 July 1969, awarded him the Air Medal for meritorious achievement while participating in aerial flight in the Republic of Vietnam from 3 October 1968 to 14 October 1968. g. GO Number 5660, dated 3 November 1969 amended GO 5273 to award him the Air Medal with the 25th Oak Leaf Cluster with “V” Device. h. He was honorably discharged from active duty on 16 January 1970. His DD Form 214 shows he completed 2 years, 8 months, and 2 days of active service. It also shows he was awarded or authorized: * National Defense Service Medal * Vietnam Service Medal * Vietnam Campaign Medal with “1960” Device * 2 overseas service bars * Aircraft Crewman Badge 6. By regulation, a. For award of the Air Medal, 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. a. b. The Army Good Conduct Medal could be awarded, for the first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June 1950 of less than 3 years but more than 1 year. A Soldier's conduct and efficiency ratings must have all been recorded as “excellent” or higher, except that ratings of “Unknown” for portions of the period were not disqualifying. There must have been no convictions by court-martial. BOARD DISCUSSION: After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board determined that relief was warranted. Based upon the documentary evidence presented by the applicant and found within the military service record, the Board concluded that all requested relief was supported by documents within the record. For that reason, the Board recommended granting full requested relief. Additionally, the Board noted the administrative notes below by the analyst of record and recommended those changes also be completed to more accurately depict the military service of the applicant. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 X X X GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING : : : DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: * deleting the Vietnam Service Medal * adding the Vietnam Service Medal with four bronze service stars * adding Air Medal (25th Oak Leaf Cluster) and "V" Device * adding Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Citation 4/29/2019 X CHAIRPERSON Signed by: 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 NOTE(S): A review of the applicant's service records shows he is authorized awards not listed on his DD Form 214. As a result, amend his DD Form 214 to reflect in item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized): * Air Medal (25th Oak Leaf Cluster) and "V" Device * four bronze service stars to his already awarded Vietnam Service Medal * Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Citation * 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. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy, criteria, and administrative instructions for individual military decorations. The Air Medal is awarded to any person who, while serving in any capacity in or with the Armed Forces of the United States, who has distinguished himself or herself by meritorious achievement while participating in aerial flight. Awards may be made to recognize single acts of merit or heroism, or for meritorious service as described below: a. Awards may be made for acts of heroism in connection with military operations against an armed enemy or while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party, which are of a lesser degree than required for award of the Distinguished Flying Cross. b. Awards may be made for a single act of meritorious achievement, involving superior airmanship, which are of a lesser degree than required for award of the Distinguished Flying Cross, but nevertheless were accomplished with distinction beyond that normally expected. c. Awards for meritorious service may be made for sustained distinction in the performance of duties involving regular and frequent participation in aerial flight for a period of at least 6 consecutive months (a month is considered 30 calendar days). 3. Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Awards), in effect at the time, stated the Army Good Conduct Medal was awarded for each 3 years of continuous enlisted active Federal military service completed on or after 27 August 1940; for first award only, 1 year served entirely during the period 7 December 1941 to 2 March 1946; and, for the first award only, upon termination of service on or after 27 June 1950 of less than 3 years but more than 1 year. The enlisted person must have had all “excellent” conduct and efficiency ratings. Ratings of “Unknown” for portions of the period under consideration were not disqualifying. Service school efficiency ratings based upon academic proficiency of at least “Good” rendered subsequent to 22 November 1955 were not disqualifying. There must have been no convictions by a court-martial. However, there was no right or entitlement to the medal until the immediate commander made a positive recommendation for its award and until the awarding authority announced the award in general orders.