RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-00266
		INDEX NUMBER:  107.00
	XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  None

	XXX-XX-XXXX	HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The decorations awarded him during his time in service be corrected as follows:

	    a.  He be allowed to exchange his Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (AFEM) for the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM).  He also believes he is eligible to receive two campaign stars.

	    b.  He be awarded the National Defense Service Medal (NDSM).

	    c.  He be awarded the Air Force Longevity Service Award.

	    d.  He be awarded the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal.

	    e.  He be awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm.

	    f.  He be awarded the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award for his assignment from 1 Jul 96 through 30 Jun 67 and for the period 1 Dec 65 through 30 Jun 66.

	    g.  He be awarded the Air Medal if eligible based on the flights he served on.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

In support of his request for the Vietnam Service Medal with two campaign stars, he provides copies of orders showing that he was TDY in Southeast Asia.

His DD Form 214 verifies his service for award of the National Defense Service Medal and Air Force Longevity Service Award.

He provides copies of orders that verify his eligibility for the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal.

Army General Order # 8 provides the eligibility criteria for award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm and he meets the criteria.

He provides copies of special orders showing his assignment to units during the periods they were awarded the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award.

He believes that his orders and flight information may entitle him to the Air Medal, but he is not sure.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered active duty in the Air Force on 14 Dec 62 and was released from active duty on 13 Dec 66 after expiration of his term of service.  He was credited with 7 months, 9 days of Foreign Service.  His DD Form 214 reflects that he was awarded the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal with 1 Bronze Star, the Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon, and the Air Force Good Conduct Medal.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPR recommends denial of the applicant’s request for award of the Air Medal, two bronze service stars for the Vietnam Service Medal, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm, and one of the two awards of the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award.

They advised the applicant on 28 Feb 03 that he was entitled to the National Defense Service Medal, the Air Force Longevity Service Award, and one award of the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award.  He was also advised that he was not eligible for award of the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm, or the Air Medal.  He was asked to withdraw this portion of his application.  The applicant responded and withdrew his request for award of the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal.  However, he refused to withdraw his application for award of the Vietnam Service Medal with two Bronze Service Stars, the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm, and the Air Medal.

The applicant was not recommended for award of the Air Medal by his supervisor, commander, or anyone with firsthand knowledge of his aerial accomplishments that were performed above and beyond that required of his peers.  He has not provided any documentation showing he is eligible for award of the Air Medal.

In their 28 Feb 03 letter to the applicant, they agreed to delete his Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal and award him the Vietnam Service Medal based solely on his DD Form 214.  He was advised that since he was TDY to Vietnam, he was not eligible for any bronze service stars.  Bronze service stars denote a unit’s campaign participation credit.  Since only units in Vietnam, Thailand, Laos, and Cambodia are credited with campaign participation, and the applicant was not assigned or attached to any unit in these Southeast Asia countries, he is not entitled to any bronze service stars.  Documentation in the applicant’s records show the applicant was deployed only two times in direct support of operations and was in Vietnam less than 30 days each time.  Also, there is no indication in his records that he was on orders as a regularly assigned aircrew member.

The Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm was awarded by the Republic of Vietnam to units directly involved with the defense of South Vietnam.  Since the applicant was not assigned or attached to any unit stationed in Vietnam, Thailand, Laos, or Cambodia that was awarded this unit award, he is not eligible for it.  The only orders he provided showed that he was administratively attached to units that were participating in exercises only.

In regards to the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award, the applicant was only assigned to three Air Force units while on active duty.  Only one of the units earned an Air Force Outstanding Unit Award while he was assigned to the unit.

The complete evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

In his response to the Air Force evaluation, the applicant seeks to clarify his requests to SAF/MRBR.  He indicates that he had only asked that his requests for the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal and the Air Medal be withdrawn until he had more evidence.  He also asked that his request be corrected to show the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm vice the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm.  The applicant also sees to clarify the issue of his TDY orders being for participation in exercises.  He provides an explanation of the exercise, “One Buck” that he participated in and which he claims his travel voucher clearly shows his flights into South Vietnam and Thailand.  He indicates that the pertinent regulation states “for the Service member’s participation during the approved campaign periods.”  He states that the regulation does not differentiate between TDY and PCS.

The applicant contends that the Air Force evaluation failed to mention the other requirements for being awarded the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal.  He lists the three requirements enumerated in the regulation and states that he fell under all three.  In reference to the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm, he believes that he clearly shows the chain of command from the Military Assistance Command to his subordinate unit.  The applicant also indicates why he is entitled to a second award of the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award.

The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, 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 error or injustice regarding the applicant’s request for award of two bronze service stars for the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM), the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross Unit Citation with Palm, and the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award with one oak leaf cluster.

	    a.    We note that the Air Force agreed to replace the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal listed on the applicant’s DD Form 214 with the Vietnam Service Medal although they later determined that the applicant’s records do not confirm his entitlement to either decoration.  Regarding the applicant’s entitlement to two campaign stars for the VSM, we note that the applicant himself questions his entitlement to the VSM based on being TDY for a period of 30 consecutive days or 60 nonconsecutive days.  He indicates that he believes he is entitled based on (1) attached to or regularly serving for one or more days with an organization participating in or directly supporting ground (military) operation or (2) actually participate as a crew member in one or more aerial flights directly supporting military operations.  The TDY vouchers and orders he submits as evidence show that he was TDY to Southeast Asia and dropped off cargo while in Vietnam, but do not substantiate his entitlement based on either of the above two criteria.  While we support the Air Force’s decision to honor their decision to grant the applicant the VSM, albeit in error, we believe that awarding two campaign stars is not justified and would only further compound the error made.

	    b.  The applicant’s rationale for his being awarded the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm Unit Citation is similarly flawed.  He was never assigned to a unit that entitled him to this award.  He was, in fact, assigned to the Unit from which he was deployed, a stateside unit not entitled to this award.

	    c.  Regarding the applicant’s request for the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award with One Oak Leaf Cluster, we agree with the rationale provided by AFPC/DPPPR regarding this award.  Again, the applicant is seeking entitlement to an award that requires being assigned to the unit to which it is granted or authorized.  He was not assigned to the unit upon which he bases his entitlement.

4.  The applicant voluntarily withdrew his request for the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal and Air Medal.  We note that the Air Force has verified the applicant’s entitlement to the National Defense Service Medal, the Air Force Longevity Service Award, and the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award (with no oak leaf clusters).  AFPC/DPPPRA has verified that they will make the administrative corrections to the applicant’s records.    We concur with the Air Force’s recommended actions and find no reason to grant the remainder of the relief requested 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 BC-2003-00266 in Executive Session on 20 August 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	Panel Chair
	Member
	Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 20 Jan 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPPPR, dated 5 May 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 May 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 9 Jun 03, w/atchs.

                                   
                                   Panel Chair