RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-04152

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be awarded the following medals:

	a. National Defense Service Medal (NDSM) – (administratively 
corrected).

	b. Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (AFEM).


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He believes that he qualifies for the NDSM and AFEM.  After 
reviewing his military records with a representative from the 
Veterans Administration (VA), the representative questioned why he 
did not have the medals listed on his DD Form 214, Certificate of 
Release or Discharge from Active Duty, as he was on temporary duty 
in Vietnam between 25 Apr 62 and 20 Jun 62.

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted into the Regular Air Force on 14 Aug 58 and 
received an honorable discharge on 26 Oct 62 after serving 4 
years, 2 months, and 13 days on active duty.

The Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal may be authorized for three 
categories of operations: U.S. military operations; U.S. military 
operations in direct support of the United Nations; and U.S. 
operations of assistance to friendly foreign nations. The medal 
shall be awarded only for operations for which no other U.S. 
campaign medal is approved.  Since its original conception in 
1961, the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal has been awarded for 
United States participation in over forty five designated military 
campaigns. The first campaign of the AFEM was the Cuban Missile 
Crisis and the award was issued for military service between 
October 1962 and June 1963. Following this original issuance, the 
AFEM was made retroactive to 1958 and issued for actions in 
Lebanon, Taiwan, Republic of the Congo, Quemoy and Matsu, and for 
duty in Berlin between 1961 and 1963. During the early years of 
the Vietnam War, the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal was issued 
for initial operations in South Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia. The 
Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal was intended to replace the 
Marine Corps Expeditionary Medal and Navy Expeditionary Medal. In 
1965, with the creation of the Vietnam Service Medal, the AFEM was 
discontinued for Vietnam War service. As the Vietnam Service Medal 
was retroactively authorized, those personnel who had previously 
received the AFEM were granted the option to exchange the Armed 
Forces Expeditionary Medal for the Vietnam Service Medal. In 1968, 
the AFEM was awarded for Naval operations in defense of the USS 
Pueblo, which was seized by North Korea, as well as for Korean 
Service, and awarded for Thailand and Cambodia operations in 1973. 
Because of these awards during the Vietnam war period, some 
military personnel have been awarded both the Armed Forces 
Expeditionary Medal & the Vietnam Service Medal. In 2003, with the 
creation of the Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal, the 
AFEM was discontinued for Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait. After 18 
March 2003, some personnel became eligible for the Armed Forces 
Expeditionary Medal, as well as the Global War on Terrorism 
Expeditionary Medal. Only one medal may be awarded, however, and 
individuals or units that deployed to the Gulf for Operation 
Southern Watch, and then immediately transitioned to Operation 
Iraqi Freedom, are not eligible for both medals. 

AFPC/DPSID verified the applicant should have been awarded the 
NDSM.  AFPC/DPSOR will administratively correct his records.

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/DPSID recommends denying the applicant’s request to be 
awarded the AFEM.  Although the applicant provided several forms 
of documentation, they were unable to verify he was assigned or 
attached to a unit that participated in or engaged in direct 
support of operations for 30 consecutive days or 60 non-
consecutive days in the area of eligibility in support of an 
operation, which the AFEM was authorized.  Further, the travel 
voucher he provided is illegible and does not give dates or 
specific locations.  They were also unable to verify the applicant 
participated in actual combat in the area of eligibility or as a 
regularly assigned crewmember flying in/out of the area of 
eligibility; rendering the applicant ineligible for the award.  
Without official documentation, they cannot verify that he 
qualifies for the AFEM.

The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

He reiterates his original contentions; however, he provides clearer 
copies of the attachments to his original submission.  In addition, 
he notes the specific dates and places of travel where he spent 
52 consecutive days at Detachment 11.  Due to the nature of his 
assignment, he is unable to state exactly where he was stationed or 
give an explanation of his duties, other than he was an advisor 
assisting South Vietnam with training, logistics, communication and 
transportation.  He also refers to the attached document “USAF FAC 
OPERATIONS IN SOUTHEAST ASIA 1961-1965” that lists the objectives of 
the operation, dates it started, and Detachments that were involved.  
He understands that the AFEM has been issued to some members who 
participated in Operation BARNDOOR.  

His complete submission, with attachments, 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, to include his 
rebuttal comments, 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 relief beyond that already granted 
administratively is not warranted.  Therefore, in the absence of 
evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting 
the requested relief.


THE BOARD DETERMINES 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 of newly 
discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application.





The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number 
BC-2013-04152 in Executive Session on 10 Apr 14 and 28 Aug 2014, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair 
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 29 Aug 13, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 12 Nov 13.
Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Feb 14.
Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 4 Mar 14.