IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  4 November 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100010577 


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 that he be awarded the appropriate number of Air Medals and that his secondary military occupational specialty (SMOS) of 67A1F be added to his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge).

2.  The applicant states that he has obtained copies of his flight records and desires to be awarded the appropriate number of Air Medals and to have his SMOS of 67A1F added to his DD Form 214.

3.  The applicant provides:

* Copies of his DD Form 214 and DD Form 215 (Correction to DD
Form 214)
* A copy of his Door Gunner Examination
* A copy of his Non-aviator Crewmember orders
* A copy of his flight records for the period July thru December 1970
* A copy of his Distinguished Flying Cross orders

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 was inducted into the Army of the United States in Memphis, TN on 2 December 1969.  He completed his basic training at Fort Bragg, NC and his advanced individual training as an aircraft armament subsystems repairman (45M) at Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD before being transferred to Vietnam on 30 June 1970.

3.  The applicant completed his door gunner examination on 14 July 1970 and he was placed on non-aviator crewmember flying status on the same date serving in MOS 67A1F (Aircraft Maintenance Apprentice).  He was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 17 March 1971.

4.  On 7 April 1971, orders were published by Headquarters, 1st Aviation Brigade awarding him the Distinguished Flying Cross for heroism on 1 September 1970 while serving as a door gunner of a helicopter gunship.

5.  The applicant was reassigned to the 129th Assault Helicopter Company on 26 January 1971.

6.  He departed Vietnam on 8 July 1971 and he was transferred to Fort Lewis, WA where he was honorably released from active duty on 9 July 1971 as an overseas returnee.  Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of his DD Form 214, as corrected by a DD Form 215, shows he was awarded the National Defense Service Medal, Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal, Army Commendation Medal (1st Oak Leaf Cluster), Distinguished Flying Cross, Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation, Republic of Vietnam Civil Actions Honor Medal First Class Unit Citation, and the Vietnam Service Medal with three bronze service stars.

7.  The individual flight records provided by the applicant show he participated in 52 combat missions for a total of 186 hours.  All of his missions were conducted in a UH1C helicopter.

8.  A review of the applicant’s records failed to show that he was ever awarded a secondary MOS of 67A1F.

9.  U.S. Army Vietnam (USARV) Regulation 672-1 (Decorations and Awards) provided guidelines for award of the Air Medal.  It stated 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.

10.  Army Regulation 611-201 (Enlisted Career Management Fields and Military Occupational Specialties), in effect at the time provides, in pertinent part, that the SQI of “F” was added to the last position of the MOS to designate personnel who were in a flying status.  Door gunner positions in career management field (CMF) 67 were also identified by this SQI.

11.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents), in effect at the time, serves as the authority for the preparation of the DD Form 214.  It provides, in pertinent part, that only the primary MOS will be entered on the DD Form 214.

12.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides that Arabic numerals are now used instead of oak leaf clusters for the second and succeeding awards of the Air Medal.  The ribbon denotes the first award and numerals starting with the numeral 2 denote the number of additional awards.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contention that he is entitled to the award of the Air Medal has been noted and appears to have merit.  The applicant participated in 52 combat missions and in accordance with the applicable regulations in effect at the time he qualifies for two awards of the Air Medal.  Accordingly, he is entitled to award of the Air Medal with Numeral 2 for the period of 17 July through 16 December 1970.

2.  The applicant’s contention that his secondary MOS of 67A1F should be added to his DD Form 214 has been noted and appears to lack merit.  The applicant has not provided and his records do not contain orders awarding him the MOS of 67A1F.  Additionally, there were no provisions at the time for adding any MOS, other than the primary MOS, to a Soldier's DD Form 214.  Therefore, there is no basis for granting this portion of his request.


BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

____X___  ____X___  ____X___  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by awarding him the Air Medal with Numeral “2” for the period of 17 July through 16 December 1970 and adding this award to item 24 of his DD Form 214.

2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to adding a secondary MOS of 67A1F to his DD Form 214.

3.  The Board wants the applicant and all others concerned to know that this action in no way diminishes the sacrifices made by the applicant in service to the United States during the Vietnam War.  The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of his service in arms.



      ____________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)                                         AR20100010577



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100010577



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1