Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01013
Original file (BC-2004-01013.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-01013
            INDEX CODE:  107.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to show that he was awarded the Distinguished
Flying Cross (DFC) and the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He had the VSM presented to him in 1969 in Okinawa, along with the Air
Medal, at an award ceremony.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a copy  of  his  personnel
records related to his Vietnam service.

Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on  8  April  1966  for  a
period of four years.  He was progressively promoted to the  grade  of
airman third class on 9 May 1966, the grade of airman second class  on
1 May 1967, and the grade of sergeant on 1  July  1968.   He  received
five Airman/Enlisted Performance  Reports,  closing  7 April  1967,  7
April 1968, 7 October 1968, 7 January 1969 and  14 December  1969,  in
which the promotion recommendations were “Highly Recommended  for  Air
Force Career,” “Highly Recommended for Air Force  Career,”  “7,”  “8,”
and “8.”  He received the National Defense Service  Medal,  the  Armed
Forces Expeditionary Medal, and the Air Force Good Conduct Medal.

The applicant was released from active duty on 6  June  1970,  in  the
grade of sergeant.  He served 4 years, 1 month and 29 days  on  active
duty.

_________________________________________________________________


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPR  states  that  the  VSM  criteria  states  that  “Personnel
previously awarded the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal for service in
Vietnam between July 1958 and July 1965, may, upon  request,  exchange
that medal for the VSM.  No one is  authorized  to  wear  both  medals
solely for services in Vietnam.”  Applicant was not in Vietnam between
July 1958 and July 1965, therefore, this option does not apply to him.
 The AFEM was awarded for service in South Vietnam, before the Vietnam
Service Medal was issued.

On 13 April 2004, a letter was sent to applicant requesting additional
documentation and a copy of his TDY orders and Travel Voucher.  He did
not respond.  Instead, he filed another DD Form 149, asking again  for
the DFC and VSM.  He did not provide any supporting documentation with
the new DD Form 149.  The applicant  may  pursue  the  DFC  under  the
provisions of the 1996 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).  The
timeline for submitting decorations to include the DFC  is  two  years
from the date of the act or achievement.  However,  under  the  Fiscal
Year 1996 National Defense Authorization Act  (NDAA),  (Section  526),
which was enacted into law on 10 February 1996, this timeline has  now
been  waived.   This  act  provides  a  process  for  veterans  to  be
recommended for decorations  if  someone  (a  previous  supervisor  or
commander), other than the veteran, with first hand knowledge  of  the
act, service, or achievement submits a written justification  for  the
decoration through a member of congress.   Therefore,  they  recommend
denial of applicant’s request.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 6 August 2004, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded  to
the applicant for review and response 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  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  the  conclusion  that  the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  We note a
letter was sent to the applicant requesting  additional  documentation
and a copy of his TDY orders and Travel Voucher.  However, he did  not
respond.  Therefore, in the absence of 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 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 30 September 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

                       Mr. Edward H. Parker, Panel Chair
                       Ms. Deborah A. Erickson, Member
                       Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 23 Mar 04, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 23 Jul 04.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Aug 04.




                             EDWARD H. PARKER
                             Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03814

    Original file (BC-2004-03814.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-03814 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 17 APRIL 2006 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross (DFC) and the Soldier’s Medal (SM) as recognition for taking charge of surviving military personnel after their C-47 airplane crashed. The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02780

    Original file (BC-2004-02780.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He received $100.00 at the time of his discharge but never received the additional $200.00. He did not receive the additional AM, nor did he receive the medal the crew officers recommended him for a deed up and beyond the call of duty. The applicant did not provide any documentation to support award of the AM or DFC.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02176

    Original file (BC-2004-02176.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The AFBCMR considered and denied the applicant’s previous request to have his DFC, 3OLC upgraded to the SS Medal for his action on 24 May 1969. He was told at the time, the 8th TFW would only submit a recommendation for one SS Medal and since the other pilot was the first to destroy 24 trucks, he would receive the higher award. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01922

    Original file (BC-2007-01922.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 15 February 1968, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the age of 19 for a period of four years in the rank of airman basic (E-1). We note the applicant’s assertion that he was awarded the DFC; however, there is no indication in his records that he was recommended for, or awarded, the DFC. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01676

    Original file (BC-2007-01676.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation provided by the applicant reflects that a citation for award of the DFC was submitted to the PACAF Awards and Decorations Board; the Board disapproved the DFC and recommended no lesser decoration be awarded. In both of the DPPPR evaluations the recommendation was to deny applicant’s request for reconsideration of the DFC. Exhibit C. Letters, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 12 Jun 07 and 17 Jul 07.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01853

    Original file (BC-2005-01853.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. The V Bomber Command, Air Corps Commanding, recommended the former member be awarded the Air Medal for meritorious achievement while participating in aerial flight. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02951

    Original file (BC-2003-02951.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    His records contain the orders for award of the basic Air Medal and the Air Medal with one oak leaf cluster, but nothing regarding a DFC. While we note that the applicant provided a copy of a citation to accompany the award of the DFC, he has not provided an approved order awarding him the DFC. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02285

    Original file (BC-2003-02285.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Report of Separation from Active Duty, issued in conjunction with his 15 October 1973 release from active duty, be amended to include the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPPR recommends denial of the applicant’s request for the Vietnam Service Medal...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00245

    Original file (BC-2006-00245.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00245 INDEX CODE: 107.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 28 July 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge, be corrected to reflect his promotion to the grade of staff sergeant (SSgt)...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | 0001810A

    Original file (0001810A.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 00-01810 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: In the applicant’s request for reconsideration, he requests additional credit for his foreign service and that he be awarded the following decorations: Air Force Outstanding Unit Award with Combat “V” Device, the Vietnam Service and Campaign...