RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-01279
		INDEX CODE:  110.00
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His temporary duty (TDY) assignments to Vietnam and Thailand be included on his DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge.

2.  His Social Security Account Number (SSAN) be corrected on his DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Applicant makes no contentions.  In support of his request he provided copies of his DD Forms 214, his Health Insurance card, a printout of the --th Wing’s organizational Branch History, an extract from his medical record; and a copy of his AF Form 7, Airman Military Record.  His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant contracted his initial enlistment in the Regular Air Force on 6 Feb 56.  He was progressively promoted to the grade of E-4, having assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 1 Feb 61.  He was honorably discharged from the Air Force on 28 Dec 65 at the expiration of his term of service.  He served 9 years, 10 months, and 23 days on active duty.  He was assigned overseas in Japan from 7 Sep 58 through 14 Sep 60 and in Okinawa from 6 Jun 64 through 6 Dec 65. 

His request for correction of his SSAN on his DD Form 214, was an administrative error that has been corrected.  In addition, the applicant's records have been corrected to reflect award of the National Defense Service Medal.  

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPAP states that although they would like to support the applicant's claim, there is no definitive documentation to validate his claim.  However, there are two comments in his record that allude to TDY to Southeast Asia (SEA).  An Airman Performance Report (APR) closing 1 Dec 64 contains a statement which states "his ability to work with others under adverse conditions has caused him to be chosen for many deployments" and a medical report states that he lost approximately 20 pounds while in SEA.  He mentioned his commander at the time in his application, DPAP contacted his commander, but his memory of that period was very vague and he could not remember the applicant.  The DPAP evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant responded and states that record keeping during the time frame in question was not much to speak for.  The APR mentioned is in conflict with a letter of support that he provided from his former flight chief.  As far as he can recall, a crew chief was always chosen for any given deployment based on his reliability to accomplish any assigned task in minimal time, under adverse conditions, and with minimal waste of manpower and material.  The section an individual was assigned to during any given deployment did not matter.  The main thing was that a crew chief must possess and have the ability to coordinate the various specialists to get the aircraft in flying status.

In support of his request, applicant provided additional copies of documents previously submitted, a personal statement, a statement from his former flight chief, and TDY travel orders.  His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPR states that there is no indication in his records that he was TDY for 30 consecutive of 60 nonconsecutive days to Vietnam, Thailand, Laos, or Cambodia during his enlistment periods, and he did not provide any documentation to substantiate his claim.  The DPPPR evaluation is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the additional Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 10 Jan 03 for review and comment within 30 days.  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.  The applicant requests that his DD Form 214 be corrected to show that he served temporary duty tours in Vietnam and Thailand.  However, the DD Form 214 does not contain an area that is used for annotating temporary or permanent duty locations as requested by the applicant.  The only means in which we would be able to show that he served in Vietnam or Thailand is if he were awarded the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM).  Criteria for award of the VSM requires that the individual serve on temporary duty for 30 consecutive or 60 nonconsecutive days.  Those time requirements are waiverable if the individual is participating in actual combat operations.  We thoroughly reviewed the applicant's submission and the available evidence of record, to include research of the --th Tactical Fighter Wing's history files, and do not find conclusive evidence which would lead us to believe that he meets the requirements for award of the VSM.  Accordingly, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  We are not unmindful or unappreciative of the applicant's service to this Nation.  In view of the above finding, we are unable to find any basis upon which 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 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 02-01279 in Executive Session on 12 Mar 02, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Apr 02, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Available Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPAP, dated 16 Sep 02.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated  .
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 26 Oct 02.
    Exhibit F.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 23 Dec 02.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, SAF.MRBR, dated