IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:  28 February 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110016176 


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 the Air Medal and Meritorious Service Medal (MSM) be added to his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) for the period ending 30 June 1982. 

2.  The applicant states:

* He was never awarded the Air Medal for his 80 flight missions over hostile territory in Vietnam
* As a member of the 765th Aviation Battalion in Vietnam he was assigned to the Vung Tau Mess and Bar Association and his duty was to order, pick-up, deliver, and inventory all supplies and food
* He was required to fly to Saigon and back over hostile country
* The MSM was not entered into his records   

3.  The applicant provides:

* Two DD Forms 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record)
* Letter of Appreciation, dated 17 November 1965
* Orders for the MSM
* DD Form 214 for the period ending 30 June 1982





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 15 October 1959.  He trained as a cook and remained on active duty through continuous reenlistments.  He served as a cook assigned to Headquarters and Headquarters Detachment, 765th Transportation Battalion in Vietnam from 26 September 1964 to 
3 November 1965.  

3.  Item 24 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 16 August 1967 does not show the Air Medal as an authorized award.

4.  There are no orders for the Air Medal in the available records.

5.  There are no flight records in the available records.

6.  Item 41 (Awards and Decorations) of his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) does not show the Air Medal.

7.  A review of the Awards and Decorations Computer-Assisted Retrieval System (ADCARS), an index of general orders issued during the Vietnam era between 1965 and 1973 maintained by the Military Awards Branch of the United States Army Human Resources Command, failed to reveal any orders for the Air Medal pertaining to the applicant.

8.  In support of his claim for the Air Medal, he provided a letter of appreciation, dated 17 November 1965, from the Mess Officer, Vung Tau Mess Association.  This letter states he worked in the Vung Tau Mess Association from February through September 1965.

9.  He served a second tour in Vietnam from 4 June 1968 to 4 March 1970.  
10.  On 30 June 1982, he retired in the rank of sergeant first class.

11.  Item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 30 June 1982 does not show the Air Medal or MSM as authorized awards.    

12.  Orders, dates 27 July 1982, show he received the MSM for meritorious service during the period 1 September 1981 to 30 June 1982.

13.  U.S. Army Vietnam 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.

14.  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.

15.  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 time and adjust it to a common denominator.





DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends he was never awarded the Air Medal for 80 flight missions over hostile territory in Vietnam.  However, there are no orders for the Air Medal or flight records in the available records.  In addition, the missions he describe appear to be category III missions.  The basic requirement for award of the Air Medal based on category III missions is completion of 100 missions.  Therefore, there is insufficient evidence on which to add the Air Medal on his
DD Form 214 for the period ending 30 June 1982.  

2.  Orders show he received the MSM.  His DD Form 214 for the period ending 30 June 1982 should be corrected to show this medal.

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 adding the MSM to item 13 of his DD Form 214 for the period ending 30 June 1982.

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 award of the Air Medal.



      _________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)                                         AR20110016176



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110016176



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1