RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 				DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03559

 						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  YES 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be awarded the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM).  


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was a member of Strategic Air Command (SAC) supporting direct 
B-52 bombing operations in Vietnam from 1969 to 1970.  

He was also on a Temporary Duty (TDY) assignment to Okinawa.

He was told that veterans who served in Thailand doing the same 
job were awarded the VSM.

The Board should consider it in the interest of justice to 
consider his untimely application as veterans in direct support 
of Vietnam operations in Guam and Okinawa performed the same 
dangerous jobs as others elsewhere and should be awarded the 
VSM.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant entered the Regular Air Force on 30 Sep 66 and was 
honorably released from active duty on 21 Sep 70. 

The VSM was awarded to members of the Armed Forces who between 
4 Jul 65 and 28 Mar 73 served in the following areas of Southeast 
Asia: in Vietnam and the contiguous waters and airspace; in 
Thailand, Laos or Cambodia or the airspace thereof and in the 
direct support of military operations in Vietnam for 
30 consecutive days or 60 non-consecutive days.  


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of the applicant’s request for 
award of the VSM.  There was no official documentation in the 
applicant’s record nor was any provided to verify he served for 
30 consecutive days or 60 non-consecutive days in the area of 
eligibility for award of the VSM.  The applicant served in Guam 
from 30 Dec 68 to 1 Jul 70; however, Guam is not considered an 
area of eligibility for award of the VSM.  To grant relief would 
be contrary to the criteria established by DODM 1348.33, Manual 
of Military Decorations and Awards, Secretary of the Air Force 
and the Chief of Staff.

A complete copy of the DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit C. 


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant on 23 Dec 14 for review and comment 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 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 office of primary responsibility 
(OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion 
the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of proof that he 
has been the victim of an error or injustice.  Should the 
applicant provide evidence, such as TDY orders or a travel 
voucher, to substantiate he served in an area of eligibility for 
30 consecutive days or 60 non-consecutive days, we would be 
willing to reconsider his request.  Therefore, in the absence of 
evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting 
the requested relief.

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 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-2014-03559 in Executive Session on 14 Apr 15 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	 , Panel Chair
	 , Member
	 , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 27 Aug 14.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSID, dated 5 Dec 14.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Dec 14.