RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04152 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the following medals: a. National Defense Service Medal (NDSM) – (administratively corrected). b. Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (AFEM). APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He believes that he qualifies for the NDSM and AFEM. After reviewing his military records with a representative from the Veterans Administration (VA), the representative questioned why he did not have the medals listed on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, as he was on temporary duty in Vietnam between 25 Apr 62 and 20 Jun 62. His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant enlisted into the Regular Air Force on 14 Aug 58 and received an honorable discharge on 26 Oct 62 after serving 4 years, 2 months, and 13 days on active duty. The Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal may be authorized for three categories of operations: U.S. military operations; U.S. military operations in direct support of the United Nations; and U.S. operations of assistance to friendly foreign nations. The medal shall be awarded only for operations for which no other U.S. campaign medal is approved. Since its original conception in 1961, the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal has been awarded for United States participation in over forty five designated military campaigns. The first campaign of the AFEM was the Cuban Missile Crisis and the award was issued for military service between October 1962 and June 1963. Following this original issuance, the AFEM was made retroactive to 1958 and issued for actions in Lebanon, Taiwan, Republic of the Congo, Quemoy and Matsu, and for duty in Berlin between 1961 and 1963. During the early years of the Vietnam War, the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal was issued for initial operations in South Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. The Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal was intended to replace the Marine Corps Expeditionary Medal and Navy Expeditionary Medal. In 1965, with the creation of the Vietnam Service Medal, the AFEM was discontinued for Vietnam War service. As the Vietnam Service Medal was retroactively authorized, those personnel who had previously received the AFEM were granted the option to exchange the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal for the Vietnam Service Medal. In 1968, the AFEM was awarded for Naval operations in defense of the USS Pueblo, which was seized by North Korea, as well as for Korean Service, and awarded for Thailand and Cambodia operations in 1973. Because of these awards during the Vietnam war period, some military personnel have been awarded both the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal & the Vietnam Service Medal. In 2003, with the creation of the Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal, the AFEM was discontinued for Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait. After 18 March 2003, some personnel became eligible for the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, as well as the Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal. Only one medal may be awarded, however, and individuals or units that deployed to the Gulf for Operation Southern Watch, and then immediately transitioned to Operation Iraqi Freedom, are not eligible for both medals. AFPC/DPSID verified the applicant should have been awarded the NDSM. AFPC/DPSOR will administratively correct his records. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denying the applicant’s request to be awarded the AFEM. Although the applicant provided several forms of documentation, they were unable to verify he was assigned or attached to a unit that participated in or engaged in direct support of operations for 30 consecutive days or 60 non- consecutive days in the area of eligibility in support of an operation, which the AFEM was authorized. Further, the travel voucher he provided is illegible and does not give dates or specific locations. They were also unable to verify the applicant participated in actual combat in the area of eligibility or as a regularly assigned crewmember flying in/out of the area of eligibility; rendering the applicant ineligible for the award. Without official documentation, they cannot verify that he qualifies for the AFEM. The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He reiterates his original contentions; however, he provides clearer copies of the attachments to his original submission. In addition, he notes the specific dates and places of travel where he spent 52 consecutive days at Detachment 11. Due to the nature of his assignment, he is unable to state exactly where he was stationed or give an explanation of his duties, other than he was an advisor assisting South Vietnam with training, logistics, communication and transportation. He also refers to the attached document “USAF FAC OPERATIONS IN SOUTHEAST ASIA 1961-1965” that lists the objectives of the operation, dates it started, and Detachments that were involved. He understands that the AFEM has been issued to some members who participated in Operation BARNDOOR. His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission, to include his rebuttal comments, in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that relief beyond that already granted administratively is not warranted. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-04152 in Executive Session on 10 Apr 14 and 28 Aug 2014, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 29 Aug 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 12 Nov 13. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Feb 14. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 4 Mar 14.