IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  10 March 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100022294 


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 award of the Air Medal and correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show his rank as sergeant (SGT).

2.  The applicant states his military records will show he was an SGT.  He further states he should be awarded the Air Medal because of the amount of flight time he completed as a flight engineer crewman.

3.  The applicant provides no additional documentary evidence in support of his application.

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 enlisted in the Regular Army on 2 October 1967 for a period of 3 years.  He completed his initial entry training and he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 67U (UH-47 helicopter mechanic).

3.  Headquarters, 765th Transportation Battalion, Special Orders Number 48, dated 18 February 1969, promoted the applicant to specialist five (SP5)/E5 in MOS 67N (UH-1 helicopter repairman).

4.  The applicant's DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows that while he was stationed in Vietnam during the period 25 May 1968 to 6 May 1970 he was assigned to perform various duties including helicopter mechanic, crew chief, senior aircraft repairman, and senior helicopter repairman.

5.  On 8 May 1970, he was honorably released from active duty and he was transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group (Reinforcement) to complete his remaining Reserve obligation.  He had completed 2 years,
7 months, and 7 days of creditable active service.

6.  Item 5a (Grade, Rate or Rank) and item 5b (Pay Grade) of his DD Form 214 shows his rank/grade as "SP/5" and "E5," respectively.

7.  Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of his DD Form 214 does not show award of the Air Medal.

8.  His records do not contain any evidence that indicates he was ever recommended for or awarded the Air Medal by proper authority.

9.  His available records contain no flight logs or other documents showing how many or what categories of missions he flew.

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides 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.  As with all personal decorations, formal recommendations, approval through the chain of command and announcement in orders is required.

11.  U.S. Army Vietnam (USARV) Regulation 672-1 (Decorations and Awards) provided guidelines for award of the Air Medal.  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:
 
	a.  Combat missions were divided into three categories.  A category I mission was defined as a mission performed in an assault role in which a hostile force was engaged and was characterized by delivery of ordnance against the hostile force or delivery of friendly troops or supplies into the immediate combat operations area.  A category II mission was characterized by support rendered a friendly force immediately before, during, or immediately following a combat operation.  A category III mission was characterized by support of friendly forces not connected with an immediate combat operation but which must have been accomplished at altitudes which made the aircraft at times vulnerable to small arms fire or under hazardous weather or terrain conditions.

	b.  To be recommended for award of the Air Medal, an individual must have completed a minimum of 25 category I missions, 50 category II missions, or 
100 category III missions.  Since various types of missions would have been completed in accumulating flight time toward award of an Air Medal for sustained operations, different computations would have had to be made to combine category I, II, and III flight times and adjust it to a common denominator.

12.  Army Regulation 635-5 (Separation Documents) establishes standardized policy for the preparation of the DD Form 214.  It states the DD Form 214 is a synopsis of the Soldier's most recent period of continuous active duty.  It provides a brief, clear-cut record of active service at the time of release from active duty, retirement or discharge.  It states that the grade in which serving at the time of separation would be entered in item 5a.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Special orders promoted the applicant to the rank of SP5.  There is no evidence in his records that he was laterally promoted to or held the rank of SGT at the time of his separation.  It possible he was an acting SGT.

2.  The applicant contends he should be awarded the Air Medal for his flight time as a flight engineer crewman in Vietnam.  Regrettably, there are no flight logs or other evidence in his available records or provided by him to verify the number of missions, by category, he flew while serving in Vietnam.  As such, there is insufficient evidence upon which to base award of the Air Medal.


3.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis to granting the applicant's requested relief.

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)                                         AR20100022294



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100022294



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1