IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 16 February 2016 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150007842 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 correction of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) to show the Air Medal. 2. The applicant states the record is in error because although he was trained to be a helicopter repairman, he performed the duties of a door gunner when he was sent to Vietnam. He contends that he flew approximately 10 to 15 combat missions as a door gunner due to the shortage of personnel, and he feels that he is entitled to this award. 3. The applicant provides: * two personal statements * two witness statements * DD Form 214 and DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214) 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. He was inducted into the Army of the United States on 4 March 1970. He was trained in and awarded military occupational specialty 68G (Airframe Maintenance Specialist). He was released from active duty on 7 October 1971. 3. Item 31 (Foreign Service) of his DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) shows he served in the Republic of Vietnam from 7 October 1970 to 6 October 1971. Item 38 (Record of Assignments) shows he was assigned to Troop B, 7th Squadron, 1st Air Cavalry, performing the duties of an airframe repairman. 4. His DD Form 214 as amended by a DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214) does not show the Air Medal. 5. The applicant provides: a. His personal statements wherein he contended that his unit participated in Lam Son 719 mission and he was asked by a crew chief to fly as a door gunner in delivering South Vietnamese troops into Laos. Four of the ten helicopters did not return and he provided cover fire for these rescue missions. In April 1971, he return to Vinh Long, and he agreed to fly as door gunner on his days off in order to give the other door gunners time to recuperate. During this time he flew maybe a dozen missions and participated in several fire fights. He also flew missions in the Secret War in Cambodia. His service warranted award of the Air Medal, but because he was a sheet metal fabricator and mechanic, he was overlooked. b. A witness statement from the former platoon leader (retired colonel/O-6), OH-6A pilot. He recounted that it was not uncommon for a maintenance mechanic or sheet metal repairman to fill in for a shortage of door gunners or crew chiefs. He stated the applicant was the door gunner on a helicopter that tried to rescue his downed helicopter but they had to break off the rescue attempt due to heavy enemy fire. c. A witness statement from a fellow Soldier. This witness remembered that the applicant flew a few missions as a door gunner and that he had been in fire fights with enemy forces near the Cambodian border and up north around Quang Tri. 6. The applicant’s record is void of flight records or documents showing his participation in aerial flights. 7. U.S. Army Vietnam 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. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The applicant's request to be awarded the Air Medal was carefully considered; however, the witness statements, although sincere, are not sufficient to determine if the applicant met the criteria then in effect for award of the Air Medal based on missions and flight time. Lacking such evidence, there is no basis upon which to grant the 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) AR20150007842 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150007842 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1