RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01709 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He was on flying status as a crew chief. He be awarded the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM), the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal (RVCM) and any additional medals he may be entitled for serving in Vietnam. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was a flying crew chief and made weekly trips from the Dover AFB to air bases in Vietnam, between 1966 and 1969. However, his records does not credit him with these flights He’s not certain how flight records are maintained; however, there should be records of crews flying to Vietnam during the aforementioned period. His medical records confirmed that he was cleared for flight duty. The applicant provides no rationale as to why his failure to timely file should be waived in the interest of justice. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 8 Jan 57, the applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force. According to an AF Form 910, TSgt, SSgt, and A1C Performance Report, rendered for the period 24 May 66 – 23 May 67, the applicant supervised a mission, in Mar 67, to Southeast Asia. On 1 Oct 78, the applicant was retired. He was credited with 21 years, 11 months, and 20 days of active service. DPSID will administratively correct the applicant’s record to reflect award of the Non-Commissioned Officer Professional Military Education Graduate Ribbon (NCOPMEGR) and the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award, with Four Bronze Oak Leaf Clusters, (AFOUA, w/4BOLCs, upon final Board action. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AF/A3O-A1F recommends denial of the applicant’s request to show that he was on flying status as a crew member. Based on the documentation provided, the applicant did not hold a Duty Air Force Specialty Code (DAFSC) with an “A” prefix which would have allowed him to be placed on flying status as a crew member and eligible for an Aircrew Member Badge. The complete A3O-A1F evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPAPP recommends denial for service in Vietnam. A review of the information provided and the master personnel record failed to provide any documents that substantiate foreign service in Vietnam. The complete DPAPP evaluation is at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPSID recommends denial for award of the VSM and the RVCM. DPSID did not find any official documentation in the applicant's record to verify he was attached or assigned to a unit for one or more days or served on temporary duty for 30 consecutive days or 60 nonconsecutive days in the area of eligibility for award of the VSM. In addition, there is no official documentation in the applicant's record to verify he was in the area of eligibility for an aggregate of 6 months for award of the RVCM. DPAPP was unable to verify the applicant as having served in Vietnam; therefore, rendering him ineligible for award of the VSM and the RVCM. The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit E. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He was stationed at Dover AFB, DE from Jul 66 to Jul 69. He and many other C-14 crew chiefs were required to fly with their aircraft on missions to Vietnam and back. He is requesting his pay statements from the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) for the period of Jul 66 to Jul 69. The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit G. 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 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 offices of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. We note the applicant indicates that he is requesting additional evidence, should the applicant provide evidence such as temporary duty orders and travel vouchers to substantiate his claim, we would be willing to reconsider his request. Aside from the administrative corrections noted above, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief. 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-2014-01709 in Executive Session on 26 Feb 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Apr 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Pertinent Excerpts from Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AF/3O-A1F, dated 13 Jun 14. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPAPP, dated 29 Jul 14. Exhibit E. Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 22 Sep 14. Exhibit F. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Oct 14. Exhibit G. Letter, Applicant, dated 8 Nov 14, w/atchs.