RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04337 COUNSEL: NO HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect his service in the United Kingdom and Republic of Korea. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He did not receive credit for his deployment to the 48th Tactical Fighter Wing at Royal Air Force Lakenheath, England, in a move to modernize its European Forces. In addition, he did not receive credit for his deployments to Korea to augment its military contingent to South Korea as a show of force. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who served on active duty from 1 October 1981 to 30 September 1985. He was honorably released from active duty for expiration term of service effective 30 September 1985 in the grade of staff sergeant (E-5). He served 4 years, 2 months, and 20 days on active duty. On 14 December 2010, AFPC/DPAPP notified the applicant that they were unable to verify his service in the United Kingdom or the Republic of Korea. DPAPP requested any personal records that affirmed his service there; i.e., travel vouchers, evaluation reports, letters of evaluation, decorations, or any other official military documents that reflected service in the contended areas. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPAPP recommends denial. DPAPP states that after a thorough review of the applicant’s service records, they found no evidence that he served in the United Kingdom or the Republic of Korea. Their office sent the applicant a letter requesting documentation to support his contentions; however, he did not respond. DPAPP states that if the Board is inclined to grant the requested relief, the applicant will need to submit the required documentation to support such changes. The complete DPAPP evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: All of his military records were lost during a 1985 flood while living in Austin, Texas; therefore, he is unable to provide any supporting documentation for his request. The applicant’s complete response 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. 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 and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. If the applicant is able to provide any source documents, (i.e., travel vouchers, evaluation reports, letters of evaluation, decorations, witness statements, sworn affidavit, etc.) to verify this information, the Board would reconsider his request. However, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. _________________________________________________________________ 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-04337 in Executive Session on 28 July 2011, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-04337: Exhibit A. DD Forms 149, dated 10 Nov 10, w/atch. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPAPP, dated 19 Jan 11. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Jan 11. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 26 Feb 11.