Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00144
Original file (BC 2014 00144.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:                   DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00144	       
				    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 the following:
 
1.  He served in Vietnam.  (Will be administratively corrected).  

2.  He served in Korea.     

________________________________________________________________ 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He served at Bien Hoa AB, Vietnam from 1968 to 1969.

He served in Korea on a 30 day Temporary Duty (TDY) assignment 
in 1970.

The applicant provides no rationale as to why his failure to 
timely file should be waived in the interest of justice.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at 
Exhibit A.  

________________________________________________________________ 

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 18 Feb 69, the applicant entered this period of active duty.

On 16 Mar 73, he was honorably discharged from active duty.  

He served 6 years, 8 months and 26 days on active duty.    

?
In a letter dated 11 Mar 14, AFPC/DPAPP advised the applicant 
they were able to verify his boots on ground foreign service at 
Bien Hoa AB, Vietnam from 30 Sep 68 to 25 Sep 69 for 11 months 
and 27 days; and Misawa AB, Japan from 28 Sep 69 to 27 May 
71 for 1 year and 8 months.  DPAPP also requested that Block 30, 
Remarks, of his DD Form 214 be changed to reflect “Vietnam-Yes.”  
Because specific locations are not annotated on a member’s DD 
Form 214, the applicant was instructed to use the letter as 
proof of boots on ground service in Vietnam and Japan.  
  
_______________________________________________________________ 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPAPP recommends disapproval of the applicant’s request for 
correction of his DD Form 214 to reflect he served in Korea.  A 
review of the documents provided by the applicant and a review 
of his master personnel records did not contain information that 
reflects he served in Korea.   
 
The complete DPAPP evaluation is at Exhibit D. 
  
_______________________________________________________________ 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 4 Apr 14, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was provided to 
the applicant for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this 
date, this office has not received a response (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 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 
failed to sustain his burden of proof that he has been the 
victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, aside from the 
administrative corrections to his DD Form 214 to reflect boots 
on the ground in Vietnam and Japan, we find no basis to 
recommend granting the additional 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 
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 Docket Number BC-
2014-00144 in Executive Session on 12 Nov 14, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

     , Panel Chair
     , Member
     , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 6 Jan 14, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records       
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPAPP, dated 11 Mar 14, w/atch.     
    Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPAPP, dated 11 Mar 14.  
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Apr 14.  
 
                                   

 

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02504

    Original file (BC-2010-02504.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    DPAPP states a review of the applicant’s master personnel records and documentation submitted failed to substantiate Foreign Service time in Vietnam. 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 injustice. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02858

    Original file (BC-2004-02858.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPAPP recommends the application be denied. While the possibility exists that he may have been in Korea at some time, he has provided no evidence substantiating he had temporary duty service to Korea for any specific dates or length of time. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application, in Executive Session on 18...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05271

    Original file (BC 2013 05271.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Vietnam service. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _______________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPAPP recommends disapproval of the applicant’s request to correct his records to reflect service in Thailand.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03321

    Original file (BC-2010-03321.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The DPAPP complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial of the VSM and RVNCM. The DPSIDR complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 10 Dec 10 for review and comment within 30 days. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05724

    Original file (BC 2013 05724.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05724 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He receive credit for his foreign service in Thailand and Guam (Administratively corrected), and Okinawa. 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-01347

    Original file (BC-2009-01347.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 5 Feb 09, the DVA notified the applicant that Veterans who set foot in Vietnam during the Vietnam Conflict are considered to have been exposed to Agent Orange since it was widely used. The RVNCM is awarded to members of the Armed Forces of the United States who served for six months in South Vietnam, during the period 1 Mar 61 to 28 Mar 73 or who served outside the geographical limits of the Republic of Vietnam and contributed direct combat support to the Republic of Vietnam and Armed...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01858

    Original file (BC-2006-01858.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the applicant indicates he has no documents that would verify his TDY to Vietnam. DPAPP’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In his response dated 19 Sep 06, the applicant provided a copy of an Air Traffic Control Rating Record (Exhibit E). Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02015

    Original file (BC 2014 02015.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02015 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO 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 and Korea (Administratively Corrected – “Boots On Ground” letter issued). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-00605

    Original file (BC-2009-00605.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    HQ AFPC/DPAPP was not able to confirm the applicant served in Vietnam; therefore, the applicant is ineligible for Vietnam service awards. 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 injustice. We note the applicant’s DD Form 214 will be...

  • 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.