SECOND ADDENDUM TO 
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04413 

						COUNSEL:  

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO

COURT DIRECTS THAT:

The Board consider whether the applicant should be awarded the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM) and Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal (RVCM) and a DD Form 215, Correction to DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, which specifies the applicant served in the Air Force.

RESUME OF CASE:

On 15 Feb 12, the Board considered and denied the applicant’s original request for award of the VSM and RVCM.  In the initial case, the applicant provided copies of paid travel vouchers and correspondence related to his receipt of combat zone tax exclusion in support of his contention he had served in the Republic of Vietnam and was therefore eligible for the requested awards.  While the Air Force OPR found these documents sufficient to conclude he served in the Republic of Vietnam and issued him a “boots on the ground” letter, the Board was not convinced that he served in Vietnam for the requisite 30 consecutive or 60 non-consecutive days to be eligible for the VSM and, by extension, the RVCM and denied his request.  For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s original request and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings (ROP) at Exhibit H.

A similar appeal was considered and denied by the Board on 10 Dec 12.  After again reviewing the additional documentation submitted in support of his appeal and the evidence of record, the Board remained unconvinced the applicant had been a victim of an error or injustice.  While the applicant provided a supporting statement from a former comrade asserting the applicant served with him in Vietnam, and was able to establish that he had boots on the ground in Vietnam, the totality of evidence presented in his case was insufficient to convince the Board he met the requisite service requirements for award of the VSM or RVCM.  Accordingly, they found no basis to recommend granting the relief sought.  For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s appeal, and, the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see Addendum to Record of Proceedings at Exhibit I.

On 15 Apr 16, counsel filed a complaint via the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin on behalf of the applicant (Exhibit J).  

On 25 Aug 16, the applicant’s counsel and the United States Attorney agreed to stay the proceedings in order for the Board to reconsider the applicant’s request for award of the VSM, RVCM, and a DD Form 215 which specifies the applicant served in the Air Force (Exhibit K). 

On 26 Aug 16, the Court remanded the case back to the Board to reconsider the applicant’s request for award of the VSM, RVCM and a DD Form 215.  Additionally, the court specified that upon receipt of the Court’s order, the applicant will make a formal application for reconsideration to the Board within 28 days.  After receiving proper application for reconsideration from the applicant, the Board will review the application and evidence submitted to assess whether the evidence provided reveals any error or injustice in the applicant’s record. 

The Court ordered the Board to specifically evaluate the evidence to determine whether, on or after 4 Jul 65, and through 28 Mar 73, the applicant was a member of the Armed Forces of the United States serving in Vietnam, or its contiguous waters or air space, as defined by Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2803, The Air Force Military Awards and Decorations Program, paragraph 6.14, which includes service in Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, or their air space, and whether during any period of such service the applicant met any of the qualifications (Exhibit L).

On 17 Aug 17, counsel filed for reconsideration on behalf of the applicant.  In his request, counsel provides a copy of the applicant’s performance report and a one page notarized statement from a comrade confirming his involvement in combat operations in Vietnam.  Counsel contends that the Board previously failed to consider the applicant’s performance report, which proves he was in Vietnam (Exhibit M).

According to the applicant’s AF Form 909, A1c, A2c, A3c and AB Performance Report, for the period of 28 May 65 through 27 May 66, while assigned to the 463rd Organizational Maintenance Squadron (OMS), Mactan Isle Airfield, Republic of the Philippines, he “participated in the initial deployment of “Operation TWO BUCK” to the Far East and Southeast Asia.  This tour called for him to fly with and maintain the aircraft at each stop, many times getting no rest or sleep except while flying on the aircraft.”

In a letter, dated 25 Oct 17, AFPC/DP3AM indicates they were able to verify and confirm boots on ground foreign service time in Guam, the Republic of the Philippines and the Republic of Vietnam, from 19 Jun 65 to 11 Sept 65, for 2 months and 24 days; Republic of the Philippines, from 9 Feb 66 to 19 Feb 67, for 1 year and 11 days, for a combined total foreign service of 1 year, 3 months and 5 days (Exhibit O).

According to the Air Force Historical Research Agency (AFHRA), the 463rd OMS was a subordinate unit of the 463rd Troop Carrier Wing (463rd TCW) based at Langley AFB, VA and had a commitment under “Operation TWO BUCK” to send aircraft and support personnel to Mactan AB, Philippines.  From there the aircraft and crews did go to Vietnam.  On 23 Nov 65, the whole unit was moved from Langley AFB, VA to Mactan AB, Philippines on a permanent basis and continued their support of combat operations.

During the first six months of 1966, the 463rd TCW settled into routine airlift operations in the Philippines and Southeast Asia. The Wing operated as a split operation during this entire reporting period.  The 773rd Troop Carrier Squadron (TCS) operated from Clark Air Base, Philippine Islands during the entire period with the 29th TCS going into operation at that location on 30 Jan 66.  The 772nd TCS went into operation at Mactan Air Base, Philippines Islands on 12 Feb 66.  The 774th TCS, 463rd Headquarters Squadron, 463rd Field Maintenance, and 463rd OMS were operative at Mactan Air Base, Philippine Islands during the entire reporting period.

The 463rd OMS had people spread throughout Southeast Asia, on a TDY basis, maintaining C-130 type aircraft.  Tan Son Nhut had become as familiar a name as Langley AFB and Mactan to the personnel of the 463rd OMS.  TDY had taken up a large part of the time spent at Tan Son Nhut.  Crew Chiefs and their crews averaged 15 to 20 days out of the month with their aircraft in Vietnam (Exhibit Q).  

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DP3SP recommends denial of the applicant’s request for award of the VSM and VCM.  DP3SP was unable to locate official documentation to verify the applicant was permanently assigned, attached, or detailed for one or more days with an organization participating in or directly supporting ground (military) operations; permanently assigned, attached, or detailed for one or more days aboard a naval vessel directly supporting military operations; have actually participated as a crew member in one or more aerial flights directly supporting military operations; or served on temporary duty for 30 consecutive or 60 non-consecutive days in the area of eligibility for award of the VSM.  Additionally, DP3SP was unable to verify he was in the area of eligibility for an aggregate of 6 months for award of the VCM.  

The VSM was awarded to all members of the United States Armed Forces who served in Vietnam or contiguous waters or airspace after 3 Jul 65, and before 28 Mar 73.  In addition, personnel serving in Thailand, Laos, or Cambodia in direct support of operations in Vietnam during the same time period also were eligible for the Vietnam Service Medal.  To be eligible, a service member must be: permanently assigned, attached, or detailed for one or more days with an organization participating in or directly supporting ground (military) operations; permanently assigned, attached, or detailed for one or more days aboard a naval vessel directly supporting military operations; have actually participated as a crew member in one or more aerial flights directly supporting military operations; have served on temporary duty for 30 consecutive days or 60 non-consecutive days.  Those time limitations may be waived for personnel participating in actual combat operations.  One bronze campaign star shall be worn on the suspension and campaign ribbon of the VSM for one or more days of participation in each designated campaign phase.

The VCM is awarded to members of the United States Armed Forces who, between 1 Mar 61 and 28 Mar 73 served for 6 months in South Vietnam, or, served outside the geographical limits of South Vietnam and contributed direct combat support to the Republic of Vietnam Armed Forces for an aggregate of 6 months.  Only members of the United States Armed Forces who meet the criteria established for the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal or the VSM during the period of service required are considered to have contributed direct combat support to the Republic of Vietnam Armed Forces; or, did not complete the length of service required, but who, during wartime, were: wounded by the enemy (in a military action), captured by the enemy during action or in the line of duty, but later rescued or released, killed in action or in the line of duty; or were assigned in Vietnam on 28 Jan 73, and served in Vietnam for the entire period between 29 Jan 73 to 28 Mar 73.

DP3SP verified the applicant was temporary duty.  During this time the applicant made several location changes and on 21 Sep 65, he spent 1 hour and 25 minutes at DaNang Air Base, Vietnam, and 2 hours at Ben Hoa Air Base, Vietnam.  On 2 Sep 65, the applicant spent 1 hour at DaNang Air Base, Vietnam, for an aggregate total of 4 hours and 25 minutes temporary duty in Vietnam.  After careful consideration of his request, on 15 Feb 12, the Board denied his request based on the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of a material error or injustice.

On 10 Dec 12, the applicant appealed to the Board and provided a notarized statement from a person he worked with during his stay in Vietnam; however, the Board again denied the applicant’s request based on the evidence provided in support of his appeal was not sufficient to override the rationale expressed in their previous decision.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DP3SP evaluation is at Exhibit N.

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 4 Jan 18 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit P).  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

In an earlier finding, the Board determined there was insufficient evidence to grant the applicant’s requests that he be awarded the VSM and RVCM and that he receive a DD Form 215 which specifies he served in the Air Force.  Subsequently, the applicant, through counsel appealed to the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin and the court remanded the case back to the Board.  As such, the Board was directed to determine whether, on or after 4 Jul 65, and through 28 Mar 73, the applicant was a member of the Armed Forces of the United States serving in Vietnam, or its contiguous waters or air space, as defined by AFI 36-2803, paragraph 6.14, which includes service in Thailand, Laos, Cambodia, or their air space, and whether during any period of such service the applicant met any of the qualifications.

After again reviewing this application, it remains the opinion of the Board that you failed to provide sufficient evidence to establish that you were more likely than not the victim of an 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 OPR and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  While counsel’s comments regarding the applicant’s performance report and the statement provided from a comrade are duly noted, we do not find his assertions sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force OPR.  As noted in our previous decision, the totality of evidence presented in his case was insufficient to convince the Board he met the requisite service requirements for award of the VSM or RVCM.  In this respect, we note the applicant’s performance report indicates he participated in “Operation TWO BUCK,” however, we do not find this evidence sufficient to show that he was permanently assigned, attached, or detailed for one or more days with an organization participating in or directly supporting ground (military) operations; permanently assigned, attached, or detailed for one or more days aboard a naval vessel directly supporting military operations; have actually participated as a crew member in one or more aerial flights directly supporting military operations; served on temporary duty for 30 consecutive days or 60 non-consecutive days; participated in actual combat operations for award of the VSM or contributed direct combat support for an aggregate of 6 months for award of the RVCM.  Additionally, with respect to the applicant’s request for a DD Form 215 which specifies he served in the Air Force, we note the applicant’s DD Form 214 indicates in Block 4 that he served in the Regular Air Force and there is nothing for the Board to correct concerning this matter.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2010-04413 in Executive Session on 6 Feb 18 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

				    , Panel Chair
					    , Member
					 , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit H.  Record of Proceedings, dated 15 Feb 12, w/
Exhibits A through E. 
Exhibit I.  Addendum to Record of Proceedings, dated 10 Dec
  12, w/Exhibits F and G.
	Exhibit J.  Letter, District Court Complaint, dated 
  15 Apr 15,
  w/atchs.
Exhibit K.  Letter, Joint Stipulation to Stay Proceedings,
  dated 25 Aug 16.
	Exhibit L.  Letter, District Court Order, dated 26 Aug 16.
	Exhibit M.  Letter, Counsel, dated 17 Aug 17, w/atchs.
	Exhibit N.  Letter, AFPC/DP3SP, dated 18 Oct 17, w/atch.
Exhibit O.  Letter, AFPC/DP3AM, dated 25 Oct 17.
	Exhibit P.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 4 Jan 18.
	Exhibit Q.  Extract from AFHRA, undated.

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of AFI 36-2603 (Title 32 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 865.1), it is certified that a quorum was present at the Board's review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board's proceedings in the above entitled matter.