RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03177

						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of 
Transfer or Discharge, issued 4 Sep 70, be amended to include his 
service in Vietnam.  (Administratively Corrected)

2.   He be awarded the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM).  
(Administratively Corrected)

3.   He be awarded the Air Medal (AM).


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He qualifies for award of the VSM and the AM.  He provides copies 
of his Temporary Duty (TDY) orders, AM order and other source 
documents to substantiate his entitlement to the requested awards.

The Board should consider his untimely request in the interest of 
justice because he just had open-heart surgery and had to review 
all of his records for correction.

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 6 Sep 66, the applicant initially entered the Regular Air 
Force.

On 4 Sep 70, the applicant was honorably released from active duty 
and was credited with 3 years, 11 months, and 29 days of active 
duty service, including 1 year, 9 months, and 18 days of foreign 
and/or sea service.   

On 21 Nov 14, DPAPP administratively corrected the applicant’s 
record to reflect boots on the ground in Hawaii and the Republic 
of Vietnam.

Upon final Board action, the applicant’s record will be 
administratively corrected to reflect award of the VSM, with Three 
Bronze Service Stars (VSM, w/3BSS) and the Republic of Vietnam 
Gallantry Cross with Palm (RVNGC, w/P).


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSID recommends denial for award of the AM, indicating there 
is no official documentation, such as a recommendation or Special 
Order, in the applicant's military personnel record to verify he 
was recommended for or awarded the AM.  In order to reasonably 
consider the applicant's request, he will need to submit a 
recommendation from someone with firsthand knowledge of the 
act/achievement preferably from someone within the applicant's 
chain of command at the time of the act/achievement, a proposed 
citation, and eyewitness statements.  

In regards the memorandum from the 6lst Military Airlift Wing, we 
believe the last paragraph to be an error, and that the memorandum 
refers to the applicant's Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM).  
Although the applicant refers to orders, we are unable to locate 
any of the award elements that should have been attached to the 
memorandum, and none were provided.  However, the citation and 
Special Order for the award of the AFCM are located in the 
applicant's record.  It seems unlikely that there were two 
decorations, the AM and the AFCM, awarded by the same unit for the 
same time period, and all the elements for one are in the 
applicant's record, but the record is silent as to the other.  If 
the National Personnel Record Center transmitted the award based 
on official documentation, we are unable to locate it.  Finally, a 
search for flight orders ended with a negative result, and the 
applicant's primary job of Aerospace Ground Equipment Mechanic, 
coupled with the absence of any references to flight in either the 
AFCM citation or the applicant's Enlisted Performance Report 
(EPR), result in it being questionable that the applicant was 
awarded the AM for sustained meritorious achievement while engaged 
in aerial flight.  The only supporting documentation is an 
uncorroborated sentence in an undated memorandum.  To grant relief 
would be contrary to the criteria established by DoDM 1348.33, 
Secretary of the Air Force, Chief of Staff, and/or the War 
Department.

The AM may be awarded to any person who, while serving in any 
capacity with the United States Armed Forces, subsequent to 8 Sep 
39, distinguishes himself or herself by meritorious achievement 
while participating in an aerial flight.  The Air Medal may be 
awarded for combat or non-combat action in recognition of single 
acts of valor, heroism, or merit while participating in aerial 
flight.  Additionally, it may be conferred for sustained 
meritorious achievement (distinction) in the performance of duties 
involving aerial flight.

DPSID also notes that based on a review of the applicant's 
official military personnel record, they were able to determine 
the applicant should be awarded the VSM w/3BSS and the RVNGC w/P, 
during his service from 6 Sep 66 to 4 Sep 70 which were not 
reflected in his records. Upon final board decision, 
administrative correction of the applicant's official military 
personnel record will be completed by AFPC/DPSOR:

The complete DPSID evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit C.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant refutes the OPR’s claim that he is not entitled to 
the AM; however, based on the criteria, he is not able to provide 
any documents awarding him the AM.  In addition, while he is not 
aware of the reasons of what he did to earn consideration for the 
AM, he seriously doubts the Air Force, Awards and Personal Affairs 
Branch would sign any sort of document, etc, without a just cause.

The applicant’s complete response, with attachment, 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 in judging the 
merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and 
recommendation of the Air Force Office of Primary Responsibility 
(OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the 
applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice.  
Should the applicant provide additional evidence, as requested by 
the OPR, to substantiate his claim, we would be willing to 
reconsider his appeal.  Aside from the administrative corrections 
noted above, 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-2014-03177 in Executive Session on 14 Apr 15 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, undated, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 28 Jan 15, w/atch.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Feb 15.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 3 Mar 15, w/atch.