Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02231
Original file (BC-2010-02231.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02231 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

The former member’s records be corrected to reflect his service in 
Southwest Asia; specifically Vietnam. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

As the widow of the former member, she needs to show her husband 
served in Vietnam to establish Agent Orange exposure in order to 
be eligible for VA benefits. She provides her husband’s 
performance report which states “He worked with Pacific GEEIA 
Region Engineers on a Radio Frequency Interference Survey in 
Japan, and has been on numerous TDY trips to Southeast Asia 
Military Aid Program Countries to provide technical …” 

 

In support of her request, the applicant provides a copy of the 
former member’s performance report and copies of his DD Forms 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge. 

 

Her complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

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. Accordingly, there is 
no need to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPAPP recommends denial. DPAPP states that although the 
former member’s performance report indicates he was assigned 
numerous TDY’s to Southeast Asia, the report fails to mention a 
location or duration. The information provided by the applicant 
and in the former member’s master personnel records did not 
contain information reflecting he served in Vietnam; therefore, 
DPAPP cannot support this request. 


 

The DPAPP complete evaluation is at Exhibit B. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant 
on 19 Nov 10 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this 
date, this office has received no response. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 its 
rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the former member 
has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in 
the absence of evidence to the contrary, 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-2010-02231 in Executive Session on 1 Feb 11, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence for Docket Number BC-2010-02231 
was considered: 


 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 27 May 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPAPP, dated 5 Nov 10. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 Nov 10. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Chair 

 

 

 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-01152

    Original file (BC-2012-01152.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 | CY2013 | BC 2013 05154

    Original file (BC 2013 05154.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    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 spouse’s 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 | CY2011 | BC-2011-02674

    Original file (BC-2011-02674.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPAPP cannot verify the applicant was TDY to Vietnam, nor verify that the author of the supporting statement provided with his submission was assigned with him at Clark AFB or in Vietnam. We note the comments of the Air Force...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04699

    Original file (BC-2012-04699.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His AF Form 7 states that he was TDY to SEA (Southeast Asia) for 85 days. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00054

    Original file (BC 2014 00054.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, personnel serving in Thailand, Laos, or Cambodia in direct support of operations in Vietnam during the same time period were also eligible for the VSM. A thorough review of the applicant’s official military record did not locate any documentation verifying award of the VSM. The applicant provided TDY Order-Military, dated 24 Jan 67 assigning him to the 4133rd Bomb Wing (Provisional), Anderson Air Force Base (AFB), Guam; TDY Order-military, dated 22 Feb 68, assigning him to the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04683

    Original file (BC 2013 04683 .txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Although, one of his performance reports indicates a TDY to Southeast Asia, it does not reflect an exact location. The evidence provided by the applicant reflects that he served on a variety of TDY assignments in Southeast Asia and in England; however, actual locations are not recorded on the DD Form 214, rather IAW AFI 36-3202, Separation Documents, Foreign Service time is reflected on the DD Form 214 in “years, months, days.” In view of the above, we find no basis to recommend granting...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03738

    Original file (BC-2011-03738.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-03738 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. DPSIDR states the applicant was awarded the Air Force Expeditionary Medal (AFEM) which is annotated on his DD Form 214. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-02202

    Original file (BC-2010-02202.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    DPAPP further requested the applicant provide official documentation, such as, travel vouchers, evaluation reports and letters of evaluation to substantiate his Foreign Service in Spain, France and Libya. DPAPP states a review of the applicant’s military personnel records do not reflect he served in Spain or Libya. After a thorough review of the applicant’s submission and the evidence of record his entitlement to Foreign Service credit for serving in Vietnam and the Philippines...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03619

    Original file (BC 2013 03619.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03619 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect his temporary duty (TDY) service in Thailand. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04686

    Original file (BC 2013 04686.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    A complete copy of the AFPC/DPAPP evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: His TDY to Southeast Asia was in Vietnam. Therefore, in view of the fact that applicant has provided a copy of travel orders that appear to substantiate the noted three-month deployment to Southeast Asia was in the Republic of Vietnam, we believe corrective action is warranted. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the...