RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2014-02506

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: NO


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of 
Transfer or Discharge, reflect the following:

   1.  Vietnam Service – Administratively Corrected.

   2.  Presidential Unit Citation (PUC).


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He served in Vietnam from January 1964 to January 1965.  His 
DD Form 214 reflects 1 year and 1 day of foreign service; 
however, no location is recorded.  This omission hinders him 
from receiving benefits.  He further contends that he received 
the PUC while stationed at Biggs AFB, El Paso, TX, from 1962 to 
1963.

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered the Regular Air Force on 19 September 
1961.

On 17 September 1965, the applicant was honorably released from 
active duty and transferred to the Air Force Reserve in the 
grade of airman first class under the provisions of AFR 39-14.  
He served 3 years, 11 months and 29 days on active duty and 
credited with 1 year and 1 days of foreign and/or service. 

On 19 August 2014, AFPC/DPAPP advised the applicant that after a 
review of his official military, they were able to verify and 
confirm “boots on ground” foreign service time at DaNang Air 
Base, Republic of Vietnam, from 31 December 1963 to 31 December 
1964, for 1 year and 1 day.  This amount of foreign service time 
is reflected on his DD Form 214, however, a correction is not 
required since specific locations are not annotated on a 
member’s DD Form 214.  The applicant was further advised to use 
this letter as proof of “boots on ground” for the Republic of 
Vietnam.


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of the PUC.  DPSID states the PUC 
is awarded in the name of the President of the United States to 
units of the Armed Forces of the United States and cobelligerent 
nations for extraordinary heroism in action against an armed 
enemy occurring on, or after, 16 October 1941, for United States 
Navy and United States Marine Corps units, and on or after 
7 December 1941, for United States Army units.  The unit must 
have displayed such gallantry, determination, and esprit de 
corps in accomplishing its mission under extremely difficult and 
hazardous conditions to have set it apart and above other units 
participating in the same campaign.  The degree of heroism 
required is the same as that which would be required for award 
of a Distinguished Service Cross to an individual.

DPSID was unable to verify any units the applicant served with 
were awarded the PUC while the applicant was assigned to the 
units.  To grant relief would be contrary to the criteria 
established by DoDM 1348.33, Secretary of the Air Force, Chief 
of Staff, and/or the War Department.

Based on their review of the applicant’s official military 
personnel record, it was determined that the Republic of Vietnam 
Gallantry Cross with Palm (RVNGC w/P) should have been awarded 
during the applicant’s service and was not reflected in his 
records.  Upon final board decision, administrative correction 
of the applicant’s official military personnel record will be 
completed by AFPC/DPSOR.

The completer copy of the AFPC/DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 23 December 2014, a copy of the evaluation was forwarded to 
the applicant for review and response within 30 days (Exhibit 
D).  As of this date, no response has been received by this 
office. 


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.  The 
applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, after reviewing 
the evidence of record, 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 the 
applicant has not provided sufficient evidence to substantiate 
his entitlement to the PUC.  Therefore, other than the 
administrative corrections cited above, we find no basis to 
recommend granting the relief sought in this application.


THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of an 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-2014-02506 in Executive Session on 12 March 2015, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:


The following documentary evidence was considered:

  Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 17 June 2014, w/atchs.
  Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Available Master Personnel Records.
  Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 24 November 2014.
  Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 December 2014.