RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01623
INDEX CODE: 100.01
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE: 1 FEBRUARY 2008
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Block 30 of his DD 214 be corrected to read “Vietnam Yes.”
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
“No” Vietnam service should read “Yes” and should be on his DD 214 from 6
Dec 65 until 5 Dec 69. He was awarded the Vietnam Service Medal. He has
no supporting evidence except a letter from Major General M. J. Ingelido,
who was the PACAF, Vice Commander during that time. He was assigned as an
advisor to the Thai Air Force. He was unaware that his TDY’s were not on
record.
In support of the application, the applicant submits a staff summary sheet
and letter from HQ AFPC/DPAPP, a letter and release consent from the VA, a
support letter from and biography of Major General Ingelido, his initial DD
149, copies of his DD 214s, and a letter from his congressman.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 31 Jan 73, the applicant was honorably discharged from the Regular Air
Force. He retired in the grade of technical sergeant (E-6). He served 20
years 4 months and 7 days of active duty service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPAPP recommends granting the applicant’s request as an exception
to policy. DPAPP states Air Force Manual 35-5 directs that a member must
have a Permanent Change of Station (PCS) to Vietnam to have the word “yes”
entered on their DD 214. The applicant was not PCS to Vietnam; however, he
did have “Boots on the Ground” at Tan Son Nhut, Vietnam, in the spring of
1967. This fact is confirmed by a memo from Major General Michael J.
Ingelido, USAF Retired.
The complete DPAPP evaluation is at Exhibit C.
HQ AFPC/DPPRY recommends denial. DPPRY states AFM 35-5 (C1), Separation
Documents and General Separation Procedures dated 31 Dec 71, Table 2, Item
20, declares that “PCS assignment to Indochina, Vietnam, or Korea on or
after 5 Aug 64” you will insert “Indochina – Yes; Vietnam – Yes; Korea –
No.” DPPRY opines this item was specified in table 2 to differentiate
between members that were actually PCS to Vietnam and those who were TDY.
DPPRY states there is no evidence in the applicant’s military records that
indicates he had PCS’d to Vietnam. However, his record indicates he was
TDY to Vietnam while serving an unaccompanied short tour to Thailand (1 Dec
66 – 22 Nov 67).
The complete DPPRY evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 15
Dec 06 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, this office
has received no response (Exhibit D).
_________________________________________________________________
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 note the applicant’s submission of a
statement from a retired general officer confirming he was in Vietnam and
the recommendation from HQ AFPC/DPAPP to approve the request as an
exception to policy based on this statement. However, we agree with the
opinion and recommendation of HQ AFPC/DPPRY and adopt their rationale as
the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of
an error or injustice. 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 AFBCMR BC-2005-01623 in
Executive Session on 31 January 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Michael J. Maglio, Panel Chair
Ms. Jan Mulligan, Member
Ms. Sharon B. Seymour, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 Nov 05, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. HQ AFPC/DPPRSP Letter, dated 17 Nov 06.
Exhibit D. HQ AFPC/DPPRY Letter, dated 4 Dec 06, w/atch.
Exhibit E. SAF/MRBR Letter, dated 15 Dec 06.
MICHAEL J. MAGLIO
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03974
The complete DPPRY evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In his response dated 23 May 07, the applicant states he is not contesting the fact that he was not stationed in Vietnam on a permanent basis; however, as his records clearly indicate, he spent considerable time in Vietnam between 1969 and 1971 on temporary duty assignments. He states that while he recognizes that Air Force Manual 35-5...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01654
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. 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 its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Credit for service in Vietnam requires a member to have served (on ground or landed at least one day) in Vietnam.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00644
In addition, his airman performance reports (APRs) written while he was stationed at Naha Air Base, have no comments of any TDY into Vietnam. The applicant was advised in 1992 and 1997, that there were no source documents in his records that confirm a TDY into Vietnam. The AFPC/DPAPP evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states he attached a copy of a TDY order for Cam...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02494
Furthermore, the applicant failed to respond to a request to provide documentation in support of his request. Mr. W. H., Veteran of Foreign Wars Post 4203 provided a letter dated 23 November 2006, stating the applicant’s military service started 3 July 1963 and he was released from active duty on 9 May 1967. Novel, Panel Chair Mr. Reginald P. Howard, Member Ms. Barbara R. Murray, Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, 8 Aug 06, w/atch.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00003
After a thorough review of the available evidence, the Board is not persuaded the applicant’s records should be corrected to show he served in Vietnam. The Board agrees with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopts its rationale as the basis for their conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03332
Although a memo from the VA states there is a document in his record that states he was recommended for the award of the Vietnam Service Medal and Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal, no such document was found in his Master Personnel Record. ________________________________________________________________ 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 | CY2011 | BC-2011-01864
DPAPP could not verify any time served in Vietnam or Thailand. DPSIDR states that based upon review of the applicants military records they were unable to verify that he served on Temporary Duty (TDY) in Vietnam from Apr 72 to Aug 72. ________________________________________________________________ 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 | CY2011 | BC-2011-04337
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-04337 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Item 30 (Remarks), on his DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge, be corrected to reflect his service in Vietnam. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01443
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01443 INDEX CODE: 107.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 03 NOV 2006 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: It appears the applicant is requesting his DD Form 214 be corrected to reflect award of the Vietnam Service Medal, the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal, and award of...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02660
We are not ungrateful or unappreciative of his service to this nation; however, absent the presence of official documentation showing that he served in the Republic of Vietnam, the applicant's request cannot be favorably considered. _________________________________________________________________ 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...