RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:	BC-2008-02218 INDEX CODE:	111.02
XXXXXXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL:	NONE HEARING DESIRED:	NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Foreign Service dates be corrected on his DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge, and his rank be corrected to staff sergeant (SSgt) (E-5).

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He should have been promoted sometime in 1968 after his return from Southeast Asia. The records proving his time in Southeast Asia were destroyed in a plane crash.

In support of his request, the applicant submits a personal statement through his congressional member and, copies of his DD Form 214 and military personnel documents to support his time in Southeast Asia.

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

STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 12 July 1966, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force at the age of 20 in the grade of airman basic (E-1). He was progressively promoted to the grade of sergeant (Sgt) (E-4) effective and with a date of rank of 1 December 1968. His records indicate he performed temporary duty (TDY) overseas beginning 7 July 1967 for a period of 155 days, and 1 July 1968 for a period of 162 days. An airman performance report for the period 25 June 1968 through 14 December 1968 verifies his TDY beginning 1 July 1968 was performed at U-Tapao Airfield, Thailand.

The applicant submitted an application to the AFBCMR on 8 June 1993 for correction of his DD Form 214 to include his duty in Southeast Asia. On 17 September 1993, AFPC responded that they had administratively corrected his record by issuing a DD Form 215, Correction to DD Form 214, to amend Block 30 to include: “Thailand – YES (5 months and 15 days.”  The DD Form 215 also

added his award of the Vietnam Service Medal with three Bronze Service Stars.

On 21 January 1994, the applicant submitted a request to the AFBCMR asking that his DD Form 214 be corrected to show his 1967 TDY as being served in Thailand and that his Blood Type be changed from O-Positive to O-Negative. AFPC requested the applicant  provide  additional  supporting  documentation.    On
16 December 1999, after the applicant submitted additional evidence, a DD Form 215 was issued to correct his blood type. In addition, AFPC/DPPRRC, sent a letter to the applicant indicating that only the timeframe, not the location, is indicated on the DD Form 214 for overseas duty; therefore, they found no justification to change his DD Form 214 in regards to his overseas history.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
APRC/DPAPP recommends no action be taken on the applicant’s request to change his overseas duty history. DPAPP indicates the applicant’s duty history has already been corrected to show his time in Thailand.

The DPAPP evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPSOE recommends the applicant’s request for changing his rank to SSgt be denied. DPSOE states the minimum eligibility requirements for promotion to SSgt during the timeframe in question were a skill level commensurate with career field,
18 months time-in-grade, and a recommendation by the immediate commander.  Based on the applicant’s date of rank to sergeant of
1 December 1968, he would have been eligible for promotion to SSgt on 1 June 1970 (not in 1968 as he contends). After a review of his records, DPAPP finds no documentation regarding a promotion to SSgt. It is DPAPP’s opinion that the applicant’s DD Form 214 correctly reflects his grade as Sgt when he was discharged on 10 July 1970.

The DPAPP evaluation is at Exhibit D.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant provides a personal letter explaining the sequence of events of his service and temporary duty in Thailand. He asserts he does not have any additional evidence because his records were destroyed in an airplane crash.

The applicant’s rebuttal is at Exhibit F.

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 an injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices 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. Therefore, in the absence of 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 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 this application in Executive Session on 22 October 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

Panel Chair 
Member
Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2008-02218:

Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 7 Jun 08, w/atchs. Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPAPP, dated 29 Jul 08. Exhibit D.	Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 14 Aug 08. Exhibit E.	Letter, AFBCMR, dated 5 Sep 08.
Exhibit F.	Applicant’s Rebuttal, dated 29 Sep 08.