Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00584
Original file (BC-2012-00584.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
 
 

 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 
DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-00584 
COUNSEL:  NONE 
HEARING DESIRED: NO 

IN THE MATTER OF: 
   
   
 
    
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
His  DD  Form  214,  Armed  Forces  of  the  United  States  Report  of 
Transfer or Discharge, be updated to reflect his foreign service 
to Spain from Jan 63 to Apr 63 and Vietnam from Jul 65 to Oct 65. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
1. His claim for benefits with the Department of Veterans Affairs 
(DVA) is being held due to the fact that his DD Form 214 does not 
reflect his foreign service.  He was told that his records may 
have been destroyed in the fire of 1973.  After requesting a copy 
of his records, he only received a copy of his DD Form 214.  Once 
he  submitted  his  claim  he  was  informed  that  an  investigation 
would  be  conducted  with  regard  to  his  eligibility.    He  can 
provide  names  of  fellow  airman.    He  believes  that  because  his 
Vietnam service is not reflected on his DD Form 214 that the DVA 
cannot make a determination to his request. 
 
2. During his 4-year tour with the Air Force, he was stationed at 
George  AFB,  CA,  and  was  sent  on  several  temporary  duty 
assignments to Spain and Vietnam.   
 
In  support  of  his  request,  the  applicant  provides  a  personal 
statement and a copy of his DD Form 214. 
 
His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.  
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
The applicant enlisted into the Regular Air Force on 18 Jun 62.  
His DD Form 214 does not reflect any foreign service time.  The 
applicant’s  performance  report  for  the  period  ending  30  Dec  65 
reflects a statement that reads, “During the recent deployment to 
SEA, A1C G worked many hours of overtime without complaining.” 
 
 
 
 
 

 
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the 
Air Force, which is at Exhibit C. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
AFPC/DPAPP  recommends  denial.    Although  the  applicant’s 
performance  report  indicates  he  was  sent  on  temporary  duty  to 
Southeast Asia, it does not specifically indicate the location. 
 
The complete DPAPP 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 7 May 12 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 applicant 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: 

 

2 

 
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-2012-00584 in Executive Session on 28 Jun 12, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 
 
 
 
 
The following documentary evidence was considered: 
 
    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 7 Feb 12, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPAPP, dated 20 Apr 12. 
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 May 12. 
 
 
 
 
                                    
                                   Panel Chair 
 

  Panel Chair 
  Member 
  Member 

 

3 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03209

    Original file (BC-2012-03209.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    Service members, who earned the Armed Forces Expeditionary medal for service in Vietnam between 1 Jul 58 and 3 Jul 65, may elect to receive the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM) instead of the AFEM. After a thorough review of the evidence presented and the service member’s military personnel records, we believe a reasonable basis exists to conclude the applicant served in Vietnam. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military...

  • 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 | CY2010 | BC-2010-00211

    Original file (BC-2010-00211.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    For that reason, DPAPP sent the applicant a letter on 10 May 10 requesting documents such as travel vouchers, evaluation reports, or other official military documents that reflect his travel to Vietnam was completed along withthe inclusive dates of the travel; however, he did not respond.Therefore, DPAPP cannot support the applicant’s request.- The DPSOEcomplete evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation wasforwarded to the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02058

    Original file (BC-2011-02058.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    His AF Form 7, Airman Military Record, Item 2, Foreign Service Summary be corrected to reflect Da Nang AB, South Vietnam. DPAPP states that based upon review of the applicant’s military records and the documentation provided they were unable to verify Foreign Service time in Vietnam. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show his race...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00026

    Original file (BC-2011-00026.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    AFPC/DPAPP verified the applicant served at Kadena Air Base (AB), Japan, from 20 Sep 67 to 22 Mar 68, for a total of six months and four days. The complete DPSIDR evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The documentation provided to date clearly shows flight time during both TDYs, in 67-68 and 68-69. Someone must know KC-135 crew chiefs flew with their aircraft on most missions at that time.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00536

    Original file (BC 2013 00536.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He has documentation from a fellow service member who served in Vietnam with him who experienced a similar problem regarding his service in Vietnam, and how his records were corrected by the Air Force. Therefore, we recommend that his records be corrected as indicated below. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00731

    Original file (BC 2014 00731.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00731 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect he served in Vietnam. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPAPP recommends denial indicating there...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00951

    Original file (BC 2014 00951.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00951 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect military service in Vietnam. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that he had boots-on-the-ground in the Republic of Vietnam. The following documentary evidence was...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02665

    Original file (BC 2013 02665.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of his DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge, issued in conjunction with his 15 Jul 68 separation; DD Form 4, Enlistment Record; AF Form 7, Airman Military Record; electronic mail from former members and various other documents. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Subsequent to the Air Force evaluation, the applicant...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 01973

    Original file (BC 2012 01973.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    This Foreign Service time is reflected on his DD Form 214. Although the Foreign Service time on his DD Form 214 exceeds that confirmed by DPAPP, other than his own assertions, he has not provided sufficient evidence that would lead us to believe that he served in the Republic of Vietnam. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or...