RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02390
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His DD Form 214 be updated to include the Vietnam Service Medal.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The reasons the applicant believes the records to be in error or
unjust and the evidence submitted in support of the appeal are at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force as an airman basic on
19 November 1964 for a period of 4 years. During the period in
question, he was an airman first class serving as a C-130 aircraft
mechanic in a noncrew member status.
Applicant was eligible for separation under the Sole Surviving Son
separation program. He was discharged with an Honorable discharge on
29 August 1966. He had 5 years, 6 months and 20 days of total active
service. He had 3 months and 2 days of Foreign Service
The remaining 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 at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPPR recommend disapproval of the applicant’s request for the
award of the Vietnam Service Medal. Applicant did not provide any
documentation showing he was TDY to Vietnam, Thailand, Laos or
Cambodia for 30 consecutive or 60 nonconsecutive days, or that he flew
as a crew member in one or more aerial flights directly supporting
military operations, even after having been asked to do so. Since the
applicant has not met any of the criteria for award of the Vietnam
Service Medal, he is not eligible for award of this medal.
The AFPC/DPPPR evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A complete copy of the evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 28
December 2001 for review and comment within 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. After a thorough review of the
available evidence and the applicant’s complete submission, the Board
majority is not persuaded that he is entitled to the award of the Vietnam
Service Medal. The Board majority agrees with the opinion and
recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopts
their rationale as the basis for thier conclusion that the applicant has
not been the victim of an error or injustice. The Board majority did not
find evidence that the applicant performed temporary duty in Vietnam for 30
consecutive or 60 inconsecutive days, or that he flew as a crewmember in
one or more aerial flights directly supporting military operations.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board majority
finds no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this
application.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
A majority of the panel finds that insufficient evidence of error of
injustice and recommends the application be denied.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered Docket Number 01-02390
in Executive Session on 13 March 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Panel Chair
Mr. Albert F. Lowas, Jr., Member
Ms. Ann-Cecile McDermott, Member
By a majority vote, the Board recommended denial of the application.
Mr. Lowas voted to grant the applicant's request and elected to submit
a minority report which is attached at Exhibit E.
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 8 Sep 01.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 18 Dec 01, w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Dec 01.
Exhibit E. Minority Report, dated 14 Mar 02.
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Vice Chair
Therefore, they cannot accept the mere fact that the applicant was on aircraft nine times during combat sortie flights as “providing direct support” to operations in Vietnam. Now if they were flying recon missions over there he believes he was assigned or attached not only to the organization but to the aircraft as well. After reviewing the evidence submitted with this appeal, we believe that the applicant has not provided sufficient evidence showing that he is eligible for the Vietnam...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2001-02390
On 13 March 2002, the applicant’s request that his DD Form 214 be updated to include the Vietnam Service Medal was considered and denied by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit F. On 6 February 2004, the applicant submitted a request for reconsideration. While the VA report does not provide conclusive evidence that would normally be required in support of this type of appeal, the majority of the Board is persuaded that it does provide plausible evidence that supports his...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02009
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-02009 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: Yes MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 25 Dec 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records reflect he was assigned to the 4133 Bomb Wing (4133 BW), Provisional, at Anderson AFB, Guam, for the period 17 Jul - 26 Oct 67, and was awarded the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM). ...
The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. In addition, his Airman Performance Report (APR) rendered for the period 30 November 1964 through 16 June 1965 states that he flew 17 missions into Vietnam during the rating period. Although AFPC has administratively corrected his record to reflect award of the AM basic and the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM), there is no evidence he was ever submitted for an additional AM.
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 | CY2002 | BC-2001-02836
If one member of a crew receives the DFC all members should. The AFPC/DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant states that in 1944 he and others were selected to be lead crew and would receive the DFC upon completion of 30 missions. He states that AFPC has erred in their recommendation and that he should be granted the medal as well as the recognition of a certificate.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02027
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02027 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC). The applicant flew 32 combat missions as a B-24 pilot and was a prisoner of war from 31 December 1944 to 8 May 1945. THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ Chair AFBCMR 02-00931 MEMORANDUM FOR THE...
AF | BCMR | CY1999 | BC-1998-00969
United States Air Forces in Europe (USAFE) major command (MAJCOM) denied this award on grounds that he was a flight surgeon and thus considered no more than a passenger on these flights, while other flight surgeons (assigned to different commands) were awarded this medal during the same period for participating on the same flight missions. HQ USAFE supplemented this regulation with additional criteria, to be applied to regularly assigned aircrew members, but not to flight surgeons. ...
United States Air Forces in Europe (USAFE) major command (MAJCOM) denied this award on grounds that he was a flight surgeon and thus considered no more than a passenger on these flights, while other flight surgeons (assigned to different commands) were awarded this medal during the same period for participating on the same flight missions. HQ USAFE supplemented this regulation with additional criteria, to be applied to regularly assigned aircrew members, but not to flight surgeons. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02299
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The War Department General Order #12 dated 11 February 1944, awarded the Air Medal (AM) to each of the pilots of the first flight of the P- 38’s, which flew across the North Atlantic from the United States to the United Kingdom, between 5-16 September 1942, for subsequent combat application. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR recommends...