RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-03259
INDEX CODE: 107.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be awarded the Republic of Korea War Service Medal (KWSM), the Republic
of Vietnam Campaign Ribbon/Medal, and the Meritorious Service Medal (MSM).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He served on active duty during the Korean Conflict in the Far Eastern Air
Forces Command, served in Thailand during 1971 through 1972, and he was
recommended for the MSM for the period 1 November 1967 through 30 April
1971.
In support of the applicant’s appeal, he submits a personal statement,
recommendation for the MSM, dated 24 December 1970, and other
documentation.
Applicant’s complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the
applicant's military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the
appropriate office of the Air Force (Exhibit C). Accordingly, there is no
need to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Chief, Recognition Programs Branch, Promotion, Evaluation and
Recognition Division, AFPC/DPPPR, reviewed this application and states that
unfortunately, the applicant submitted requests to the Army, National
Personnel Records Center (NPRC), and through Congressional and BCMR
channels, all at about the same time. The National Personnel Records
Center first sent the case to the Army, but this office is responsible for
final determination of award of the Republic of Korea War Service Medal, so
the case was returned to the NPRC. Prior to the return of the records,
SAF/MIBR opened a Board case, but it could not be pursued without the
records. While SAF/MIBR was waiting for the records, the NPRC received a
request and forwarded that request and his records to AFPC/DPPPR. This
resulted in their 21 February 2001 letter to the applicant, explaining that
he was not eligible for the Republic of Korea War Service Medal, and there
was no indication in his records indicating he was recommended for, or
awarded, the MSM. He was asked to provide a copy of the order awarding him
this decoration. Shortly after this, it was discovered that the BCMR case
was still open and needed to be addressed. This resulted in their 21 March
2001 letter, informing the applicant that his recommendation for the MSM
had been downgraded to the Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM), that he had
already received sets of his awards and decorations, and that he should
apply to a commercial source for additional sets and foreign medal sets.
He was asked to withdraw his request for award of the MSM again. The
applicant did not reply to either letter.
They recommend disapproval of the applicant’s request for award of the
Republic of Korea War Service Medal, issuance of the Republic of Vietnam
Campaign Medal, and award of the Meritorious Service Medal for the period 1
November 1967 through 30 April 1971.
A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit
C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 29 June 2001 a complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded
to the applicant for review and response within thirty (30) days. As of
this date, no response has been received by this office.
_________________________________________________________________
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 probable error or injustice. We took notice of the
applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however,
we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force and adopt
their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not
been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of
evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting
the relief sought in this application.
4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been
shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially
add to our understanding of the issue(s) involved. Therefore, the request
for a hearing is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate
the existence of probable material error or injustice; that the application
was denied without a personal appearance; and that 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 this application in Executive
Session on 1 August 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Panel Chair
Mr. William E. Edwards, Member
Mr. Thomas J. Topolski, Jr., Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 July 2000, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 19 June 2001, w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 29 June 2001.
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Vice Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00004
For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s appeal and the rationale of the earlier decision of the Board, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit E. In a letter, dated 18 March 2001, the applicant provided additional documentation, to include a newspaper article regarding retroactive award of the DFC to a World War II veteran, and requested reconsideration of his application. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00314
DPPD states based on a review of his DVA records and personnel files, he served as an aircrew member for many years while on active duty and his impaired hearing is combat-related but his tinnitus is not combat-related. Since the applicant's request for CRSC compensation for his hearing loss and tinnitus has been approved by the CRSC board, the only matter requiring consideration by this Board is his request for award of the KSM, PH, BS, and MSM. After a thorough review of the applicant's...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Recognition Programs Branch, AFPC/DPPPR, reviewed the application and states that there is no indication in the member’s records that he was ever recommended for a decoration or awarded one, such as the AFCM. It is incomprehensible to think that in his father’s entire military career covering World War II, Korea and service up to 1962, that he did not accomplish a specific project, plan or...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-03245
The BCMR Medical Consultant states, in part, that a review of previous Military Correction Board cases, Army, Navy, and Air Force, reflects a definite trend of denial of the PH medal due to reported cold injuries, but particularly frostbite, with some presenting more clinically apparent than others. The BCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is attached at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He and...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-01496 INDEX CODE: 100.07 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records (DD Form 214, Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States) be corrected to reflect his Air Traffic Controller training, ANURD/2 (VHF/DF) training, Tower Chief training, and Control Center training. ...
Had he not been reassigned he would have completed a total of 35 combat missions and met the requirement for award of a DFC (i.e., completion of 35 combat missions). After a thorough review of the applicant’s submission and the supporting documentation he provided, we are not persuaded that his record should be corrected to reflect completion of 28 combat missions or that he be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC). After a thorough review of his submission and the supporting...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02063
In support of his request, applicant provided copies of his DD Form 214/DD Form 215, a document from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts signed by the Governor thanking him for his performance of duties in the Korean War, and a copy of his DD Form 256 AF, Honorable Discharge from the Air Force. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR recommends denial since no foreign service is listed on applicant’s DD Form 214 and the office of...
He also completed three missions as a B-17F navigator. During World War II, the 8th Air Force had an established policy whereby a DFC was awarded upon the completion of 30 combat flight missions and an AM was awarded upon the completion of five missions. In 1944, the 8th Air Force required completion of 30 combat flight missions; however, the applicant did not complete 30 missions.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00836
___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends the applicant’s request be denied, and states, in part, the applicant was deployed in support of ONW and OEF, while assigned to Incirlik Air Base, Turkey, from December 2000 to March 2002. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit F. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Under the heading...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01409
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends denial. Any Air Force member or veteran who was awarded the DFC for heroism on or after 18 September 1947 is now authorized to wear the “V” Device on the DFC. The Distinguished Flying Cross is considered a valorous award; therefore, the “V” device is not required and is considered superfluous.