RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-02476
INDEX CODE: 107.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be awarded the Vietnam Service Medal.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was assigned to Clark AB, PI on 9 Jun 68 and was sent on temporary duty
(TDY) to Vietnam shortly thereafter. He remained in Vietnam until some
time in October 1968.
In support of his request, applicant provided a personal statement, his DD
Fm 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge;
and, his DD Form 215, Correction to DD Fm 214. His complete submission,
with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant's military personnel records cannot be located by personnel at
the National Personnel Records Center, St. Louis, MO. Therefore, the
facts surrounding his separation from the Air Force cannot be verified.
_________________________________________________________________
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 find no evidence of error in
this case and after a thorough review of the documentation that has been
submitted in support of his appeal, we do not believe that he has suffered
an injustice. Other than his own assertions, we have seen no evidence by
the applicant that would lead us to believe that he served in the Republic
of Vietnam during the period in question. Therefore, in the absence of
persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to
recommend granting the relief sought in this application.
_________________________________________________________________
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 Docket Number 01-02476 in
Executive Session on 25 Apr 02, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Joseph A. Roj, Panel Chair
Mr. John E. Pettit, Member
Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 23 Aug 01, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Dec 01, w/atchs.
JOSEPH A. ROJ
Panel Chair
For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit C. On 20 May 2002, the applicant submitted a VA rating and a copy of his performance report and requested reconsideration. While the performance report does not provide conclusive evidence that would normally be required in support of this type of appeal, we are persuaded that it does provide plausible evidence that supports his...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-01027 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Purple Heart (PH) medal. He was awarded the PH by a general officer while he was in the hospital. He recently received a formal letter of presentation from the President of Korea which included the new ribbon and medal.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit D). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit E). The Board staff is directed to inform applicant of this decision.
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR states that the applicant’s records were thoroughly reviewed for his eligibility for, and entitlement to, all awards and decorations. 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 Staff and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim...
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for review and response (Exhibit D). Applicant should also be informed that this decision is final and will only be reconsidered upon the presentation of new relevant evidence which was not available at the time the application was filed.
In support of his request, applicant provided a copy of his Individual Flight Records. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s available military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR reviewed applicant’s request and recommends denial. His Individual Flight Records show that he...
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). After careful consideration of applicant's request and the available evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or injustice to warrant corrective action.
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-00078
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: When he remarried on 12 Mar 99, he advised ARPC of his change in marital status and was never counseled by ARPC that he had a year to cancel his SBP benefit coverage on his new spouse. Member stated he contacted ARPC after his remarriage and was not counseled that he had one year to cancel his RCSBP benefit. The ARPC/DPS evaluation is at Exhibit...
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: When he remarried on 12 Mar 99, he advised ARPC of his change in marital status and was never counseled by ARPC that he had a year to cancel his SBP benefit coverage on his new spouse. Member stated he contacted ARPC after his remarriage and was not counseled that he had one year to cancel his RCSBP benefit. The ARPC/DPS evaluation is at Exhibit...
On 27 Jun 01, the applicant received a LOR for driving under the influence (DUI) as well as a letter from his commander nonrecommending him for promotion to E- 5 for cycle 00E5. Dismissal of the charges against the applicant involved neither the presentation of any evidence nor any factual findings as to the merits of those charges. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...