Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-02383
Original file (BC-2012-02383.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
 

 
 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 
 

DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-02383 
COUNSEL: NO 
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  corrected  to  reflect  his  service  in 
Vietnam.   
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
He was on temporary duty (TDY) to Vietnam from 27 January 1968 to 
6 March 1968.   
 
The  applicant’s  complete  submission,  with  attachments,  is  at 
Exhibit A. 
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
The  applicant  is  a  former  member  of  the  Regular  Air  Force  who 
served on active duty from 26 May 1967 to 25 May 1973.  His DD 
Form 214 reflects that he served 9 months and 16 days of Foreign 
Service.   
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
AFPC/DPAPP recommends denial.  DPAPP states that after a thorough 
review of the applicant’s military service records, they found no 
evidence to substantiate the applicant served any Foreign Service 
in  Vietnam.    Although,  one  Airman  Performance  Report  reflects 
temporary  duty  to  Southeast  Asia,  they  are  unable  to  determine 
the exact location in Southeast Asia.   
 
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 28 August 2012, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit 
D).  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.    In  this 
respect, we note there was no entry on the DD Form 214, issued at 
the time of his 1973 release from active duty, to reflect service 
in  the  Republic  of  Vietnam  (RVN).    As  such,  it  would  be 
inappropriate to make such a correction.  His DD Form 214 does 
reflect  9  months  and  16  days  of  Foreign  Service  and  there  has 
been no showing this information is incorrect. Therefore, we find 
no  evidence  of  an  error  concerning  the  DD  Form  214.  
Notwithstanding this however, we did consider whether his records 
should  be  corrected  to  reflect  his  service  in  the  RVN  in  the 
interest  of  justice,  as  many  similarly  situated  applicants 
request  such  a  correction  in  order  support  applications  to  the 
Department  of  Veterans  Affairs  (DVA)  for  service-connections  of 
various ailments resulting from herbicide exposure.  However, in 
the applicant’s case, for the purpose of determining a service-
connection  for  his  diabetes  mellitus,  the  DVA  resolved  the 
indeterminate  evidence  regarding  his  RVN  service  in  his  best 
interest.  In view of this, we do not believe his record should 
be  disturbed  in  the  interest  of  justice.    While  the  DVA 
determined they could not deny the possibility the applicant was 
stationed TDY in the RVN at some point from 27 January 1968 to 
6 March 1968 for the purpose of conceding herbicide exposure, we 
do  not  find  substantial  evidence  to  recommend  disturbing  the 
record. However, if the applicant is able to provide any source 
documents, (i.e., travel vouchers, evaluation reports, letters of 
evaluation,  decorations,  witness  statements,  sworn  affidavits, 
etc.) to verify his RVN service and the dates he performed such 
service, the Board would be willing to reconsider a request that 
his records reflect said service.  
 
_________________________________________________________________ 
 

 2

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-2012-02383  in  Executive  Session  on  21  February  2013, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 

 
The  following  documentary  evidence  was  considered  in  connection 
with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-02383: 
 

Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 May 12 w/atchs. 
Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 
Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPAPP, dated 24 Jul 12. 
Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Aug 12.  

 
 
 

_____________________, Chair 
_____________________, Member 
_____________________, Member 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 

  
  

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

_________________________ 
Chair 

 3



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00426

    Original file (BC 2013 00426.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00426 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Report of Separation from Active Duty, be corrected to reflect his service in Vietnam. The applicant provided an excerpt of a DVA Rating Decision indicating they verified he served “Boots-on-the-ground” in the Republic of Vietnam...

  • 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 | CY2011 | BC-2011-03067

    Original file (BC-2011-03067.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    His military service record be corrected to reflect the time he served in Vietnam. The DVA stated the evidence of record showed he served in the Republic of Vietnam during the Vietnam Era, therefore, exposure to herbicides is conceded. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPAPP recommends denial of his request for service in Vietnam.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03707

    Original file (BC-2012-03707.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The remaining relevant facts pertaining to his application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPAA recommends denial, indicating that based on the evidence provided, a temporary duty (TDY) assignment to the RVN cannot be confirmed. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPAPP evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03553

    Original file (BC 2013 03553 .txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    DPSID states that the Air Force Personnel Center, Directorate of Assignments was unable to verify the applicant's Foreign Service time in Vietnam. Moreover, the applicant’s TDY orders and the Foreign and/or Service time reflected on his DD Form 214 match up perfectly. _______________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that he...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03832

    Original file (BC-2006-03832.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. There are no documents in his Master Personnel Record that show the location of any TDYs during his tour of duty in the Air Force, and there is also no evidence of any Red Cross notification. Should the applicant provide documentation that he was TDY to Japan and/or Vietnam, the Board would reconsider his request.

  • 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 | CY2012 | BC-2012-00726

    Original file (BC-2012-00726.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Although he has been unable to provide copies of travel vouchers in support of his request, it is our opinion that the applicant has provided sufficient evidence to persuade us that he served in Vietnam. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that he had boots on the ground in Da Nang Air Base, Vietnam, from 21 Mar 1972 through 20...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-02870

    Original file (BC-2012-02870.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, the DVA denied his claim because he could not provide a copy of his TDY orders or any official verification that he ever deployed to Thailand during the Vietnam War. The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 29 Oct 12, by letter, the applicant reiterates his original contentions. _________________________________________________________________ The following...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00316

    Original file (BC-2011-00316.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant served on active duty in the Air Force from 28 Jun 68 to 8 Apr 72. On 19 Apr 11, AFPC/DPAPP sent a letter to the applicant requesting documentation such as travel vouchers, evaluation reports, letters of evaluation, decorations, or other official military document that reflects that travel was completed and the inclusive periods of the travel; however he has not responded to this request. ...