Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02474
Original file (BC-2004-02474.doc) Auto-classification: Denied


                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-02474
            INDEX CODE:  107.00

      XXXXXXX    COUNSEL:  NONE

      XXXXXXX    HEARING DESIRED: NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be awarded the Vietnam Service Medal.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was stationed at a base overseas for 171 consecutive days during
the period Oct 72 to Mar 73.

In support of  his  appeal,  applicant  submitted  a  copy  of  his
DD Form 214, dated 25 Jan 74.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant served on active duty in the Regular Air Force during the
period 26 Jan 70 to 25 Jan 74.

He was awarded the National Defense Service Medal and the Air Force
Good Conduct Medal.  His DD Form 214, Item 19, Indochina  or  Korea
Service since August 5, 1964, reflects Yes, and 171 days.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ ARPC/DPRFQ reviewed this application and recommended denial.  On
1 Sep 04, a letter  was  sent  requesting  a  copy  of  the  travel
voucher/decoration/Airman Performance  Report  to  show  the  exact
location where the member was stationed in  Vietnam.   He  did  not
respond.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to  the  applicant
on 8 Oct 04 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 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  office  of  primary  responsibility  and  adopt   their
rationale as the basis for our conclusion that  the  applicant  has
not been the victim of an error or injustice.  ARPC/DPRF  requested
applicant provide  supporting  documentation  to  substantiate  his
eligibility for the award; however, he did not respond.  Should the
applicant provide documentation to substantiate his claim, we would
be willing to reconsider his petition.  In view of  the  above,  we
find no 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 AFBCMR Docket  Number
BC-2004-02474 in Executive Session on 17 November 2004,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Ms. Kathy L. Boockholdt, Panel Chair
      Mr. Wallace F. Beard Jr., Member
      Mr. Albert C. Ellett, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 May 04, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ ARPC/DPRFQ, dated 6 Oct 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Oct 04.




                                   KATHY L. BOOCKHOLDT
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02883

    Original file (BC-2004-02883.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    In support of his response, applicant provided a personal statement; a letter from his wing commander, and letter of certification from the military personnel flight. The attached AF Form 709, Promotion Recommendation Form (PRF), prepared for the Fiscal Year 2005 (FY05) Line and Health Professions Lieutenant Colonel Position Vacancy (PV) Promotion Selection Board, was accepted for file on 21 April 2004. c. It is further recommended that his record, to include the attached AF Form 709,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03660

    Original file (BC-2004-03660.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s complete submissions are at Exhibit A. Applicant has not provided credible evidence why these awards were not placed in official channels and has not provided justification as to why these issues were not addressed until six years after the fact. However, other than his own uncorroborated assertions, no evidence has been submitted to show that recommendations for the AFAM and AFCM were placed into official military channels during the time periods in question but were not acted...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00737

    Original file (BC-2004-00737.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00737 INDEX CODE: 136.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: YES ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to show that he retired from the Air Force Reserve at age 60 rather than being separated with Disability Severance Pay. He was briefed that the letter of eligibility for retired pay at...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03045

    Original file (BC-2002-03045.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Since his request was somewhat unclear, the office of primary responsibility contacted the applicant and requested that he provide more information on the specific benefits to which he was referring. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC- 2002-03045 in Executive Session on 8 April 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Ms. Kathy L. Boockholdt, Panel Chair Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Member Mr....

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03045

    Original file (BC-2002-03045.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Since his request was somewhat unclear, the office of primary responsibility contacted the applicant and requested that he provide more information on the specific benefits to which he was referring. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC- 2002-03045 in Executive Session on 8 April 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Ms. Kathy L. Boockholdt, Panel Chair Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Member Mr....

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02429

    Original file (BC-2004-02429.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his request, applicant provided a copy of his DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge). Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPAPP, dated 24 Sep 04, w/atch. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Oct 04.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03489

    Original file (BC-2005-03489.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Applicant states that her DFAS-CL 7220/48, Retiree Account Statement, shows an error for the RCSBP cost of $29.66 and request this error be corrected. She chose option C because their were no mention of RCSBP cost in Section VI, and the base personnel office did not make her aware of the cost associated with electing Option C. She never expected to pay for anything except for one payment for spouse...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01381

    Original file (BC-2004-01381.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 22 Dec 72, the discharge authority directed the applicant be discharged without P&R, and that he be issued a DD Form 257AF, General Discharge Certificate. Exhibit D. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 18 May 04. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 May 04.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03708

    Original file (BC-2002-03708.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. In fact, the evidence of record shows that the applicant received the initial RCSBP package at his home on 21 November 1997, and did not respond to it. Exhibit C. Letter, HQ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01323

    Original file (BC-2004-01323.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01323 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214 be corrected to reflect he received three Air Force Achievement Medals (AFAMs) and the Air Force Longevity Service Award. His DD Form 214 reflects he was awarded the AFAM, Air Force Training Ribbon, Air Force...