RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-02545
INDEX CODE: 128.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her husband’s records be corrected to reflect his time served in Thailand
from 1972 through 1973 and she be issued a new DD Form 214, Report of
Separation from Active Duty.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Her husband was stationed in Thailand for one year or more. She has
letters he wrote from Thailand and the names of some of the people he
served with. He was an aircraft mechanic who worked on planes that flew to
Vietnam. He died of non-hodgins lymphoma. She needs his DD 214 corrected
to submit a service-connected claim.
In support of her request, the applicant submits copies of the former
service member’s DD Form 214 and DD Form 1966/1-5, Record of Military
Processing – Armed Forces of the United States and a letter from the former
service member.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The former service member enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 22 Feb 73.
He was released from active duty on 21 Feb 77 with an honorable
characterization of service in the grade of sergeant. He served four years
on active duty.
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:
HQ AFPC/DPAPP recommends denial. DPAPP states they were unable to confirm
any overseas service time for the former service member. The information
provided by the applicant did not verify her husband served in Thailand or
Vietnam.
The complete DPAPP evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant submitted a copy of a letter from someone who served two
temporary duty tours with her husband in Thailand during the time in
question. She expressed her frustration with the length of time it has
taken to process her application. She states her husband gave 20 years of
his life for his country and she cannot describe how she feels about how
veterans are treated.
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________
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 an 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 its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that
the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. While the
applicant argues that the DD Form 1966/1, Record of Military
Processing–Armed Forces of the United States shows her husband’s military
overseas duty from 13 Dec 72 to 21 Feb 73, the available records reflect
that he was in the delayed enlistment program during this time and
therefore could not have been TDY to Thailand. It appears the applicant is
under the assumption that the acronym “DEP” reflected on the DD Form 1966/3
means “deployed” when it in fact means “delayed enlistment program.” In
addition, the witness statement indicates they both served together from
Oct 73 to Dec 73, which does not agree with the timeframe indicated by the
applicant. Based on these inconsistencies and the lack of corroborating
evidence, we conclude the applicant has failed to sustain her burden of
establishing that her deceased husband suffered either an error or an
injustice. Should the applicant secure a notarized statement from the
witness along with proof the witness was in fact TDY during the same
timeframe, we would be willing to reconsider her application. In the
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to grant 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-2009-02545 in
Executive Session on 30 Jun 10, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Panel Chair
Member
Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 16 Jul 09, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPAPP, dated 12 Apr 10.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Apr 10.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 11 May 10, w/atch.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05154
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-05154 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her spouses records be corrected to reflect his foreign service in Vietnam and award of the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM). ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPAPP recommends denial indicating...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-01152
We took note of the applicant's complete submission, to include her rebuttal response, in judging the merits of the case; however, while it is clear from the documentation provided the deceased former service member served on a variety of temporary duty (TDY) assignments in the Southeast Asia Theater of Operations, we do not find the evidence presented sufficient to conclude his DD Form 214 should be corrected as she requests. After a thorough review of the evidence presented and the...
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00709
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00709 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect service in Vietnam. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The time he spent in Vietnam is not recorded accurately. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02634
--The Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal (RVNCM) is awarded to members who: (1) served for six months in South Vietnam during the period 1 Mar 61 and 28 Mar 73; (2) served outside the geographical limits of South Vietnam and contributed direct combat support to the RVN Armed Forces for an aggregate of six months--only members who meet the criteria established for the AFEM (Vietnam) or the VSM during the period required are considered to have contributed direct combat support to the RVN Armed...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04655
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR) which are included at Exhibits C and D. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPAPP recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPAPP evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial of the applicants requests...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03152
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03152 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED _____________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge, be corrected to reflect his service in Vietnam. The complete DPAPP evaluation is at Exhibit...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-01942
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-01942 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge, be amended to reflect his Republic of Vietnam (RVN) service and medals. DPSIDR states the applicant only served in Vietnam for 13 days; thereby...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01030
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01030 INDEX CODE: 107.00 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: Yes MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 27 Sep 06 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214 reflect award of the Joint Service Commendation Medal (JSCM), the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award with Valor (AFOUA w/V), the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (AFEM), the...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03251
His DD Form 214 be corrected to reflect his TDY to Vietnam. We note the applicants records have been administratively corrected to reflect his foreign service in Thailand. In this regard, 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 the applicant has not been the victim of an error or...