RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:  			DOCKET NO:  01-01666
					INDEX CODE:  107.00, 110.00

						COUNSEL:  DAV

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His DD Form 214 be corrected to reflect service in Indochina and the ribbons and medals incident to that service.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He served with the numbered Communications Group from Dec 72 to Apr 74.  He participated in flights to Guam, Philippines, Taiwan, Taipei and Korea, which should qualify for the requested service and awards/decorations.

In support of his request, applicant submits a copy of his DD Form 214.  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted his enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 20 Nov 70 in the grade of airman basic (E-1) for a period of 4 years.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of sergeant (E-4), with an effective date and date of rank of 1 Sep 72.  During the period Dec 72-May 74, he was assigned to the numbered Communications Group, Kadena AB, Japan.  He was released from active duty in the grade of E-4 and transferred to the Air Force Reserve on 20 Jun 74.  At the time of his separation, he had completed a total of 3 years, 7 months and 1 day of service, which included 1 year, 4 months and 19 days of foreign service.  He was awarded the National Defense Service Medal (NDSM) and the Air Force Good Conduct Medal (AFGCM).  On 19 Nov 76, he was relieved from his Air Force Reserve assignment and honorably discharged from the Air Force Reserve.
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPPR recommends the application be denied.  DPPPR stated that there is no documentation available to show the applicant was assigned or attached to a unit in Indochina or Korea during his active duty service.  There is no indication the applicant served in Indochina, and there are no awards or decorations associated with service in Indochina during the period he was on active duty.  Therefore, there is nothing to consider in the way of awards and decorations.  The HQ AFPC/DPPPR evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPRS recommends the application be denied.  Based upon the documentation in applicant’s file, DPPRS believes the discharge was consistent with the procedural and substantive requirements of the discharge regulation at that time.  The applicant did not submit any new evidence or identify any errors or injustices that occurred in the discharge processing.  He provided no other facts warranting a change in his DD Form 214.  The HQ AFPC/DPPRS evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on 15 November 2001 and to counsel on 20 December 2001 for review and response.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office (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 probable error or injustice.  We took notice of the applicant's submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility (HQ AFPC/DPPPR) and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden that he has suffered either an error or an injustice.  In view of the above and absent documentary evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of probable 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 Docket Number 01‑01666 in Executive Session on 20 February 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	            Panel Chair
	            Member
	            Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 May 01, w/atch.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPR, dated 22 Oct 01, w/atch.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 8 Nov 01
   Exhibit E.  Letters, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Nov 01 and 20 Dec 01.