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


IN THE MATTER OF: 				DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03600

 						COUNSEL:  NONE

						HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of 
Transfer or Discharge, be amended to reflect that he served in 
Vietnam.

His DD Form 214 be amended to reflect he was awarded the 
following awards:

	Air Force Outstanding Unit Award (AFOUA) (Will be 
administratively corrected);

	National Defense Service Medal (NDSM) (Already reflected on 
DD Form 214).

	Presidential Unit Citation (PUC);

	Vietnam Campaign Medal (VCM);

        Small Arms Expert Marksmanship Ribbon (SAEMR);

        Air Medal (AM).  


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The Air Force confirmed he served during the Vietnam Summer-Fall 
Campaign from 15 June 1969 to 4 October 1969 for 3 months and 
19 days.  His DD Form 214 reflects 3 months and 24 days of 
foreign service.  However, the Air Force will not include the 
Vietnam location on his DD Form 214.  It is unjust to not 
identify the location of his foreign service.

In support of his requests, the applicant provides copies of 
news article, e-mail communique, a picture of a ribbon bar that 
includes the requested awards.  

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 11 August 1966, the applicant entered active duty and was 
honorably discharged on 10 August 1970.  

On 1 July 2014, the Board considered and denied a similar appeal 
(BC-2013-04172) requesting that he be awarded the PUC, AFOUA 
with three Bronze Oak Leaf Clusters (AFOUA w/3 BOLCs), AM, SAEMR 
and the VCM.  The Board determined there was insufficient 
evidence presented to substantiate an error or injustice and 
denied his requests.  For an accounting of the facts and 
circumstances surrounding the applicant’s requests, and, the 
rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record 
of Proceedings at Exhibit C.


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOR recommends denial of the applicant’s request to amend 
his DD Form 214 to reflect that he served in Vietnam.  DODI 
1336.01, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty DD 
Form 214/5 Series, and governing Air Force instructions and 
policy do not authorize the listing of deployment or service on 
foreign soil by name on a DD Form 214.  

The applicant’s DD Form 214 reflects service by receipt of the 
Vietnam Service Medal with a Bronze Service Star.  As proof of 
his foreign service location, the applicant was provided a 
memorandum by HQ AFPC/DPSIDR dated 13 November 2012, which 
states “We were able to verify you served during the Vietnam 
Summer-Fall Campaign which spanned from 15 June 1969 to 
4 October 1969 which qualifies you for one Bronze Service Star 
to your previously awarded Vietnam Service Medal.”  Such 
statements are recognized by veteran support agencies, as not 
listing foreign service locations is universal within the DOD.  
The applicant failed to provide supporting documentation to 
support the absence of Vietnam as a service location was in 
error and counter to governing directives and instructions or 
outline an injustice by the absence of such a statement.  DPSOR 
finds no errors in the applicant’s DD Form 214.   

A complete copy of the DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit D.

AFPC/DPSID recommends disapproval of the requests for award of 
the PUC, SAEMR and VCM.  The applicant previously submitted a DD 
Form 149 for some of the same awards as this request.  Per 
AFBCMR memorandum dated 4 August 2014, the Board denied the 
applicant’s requests.  At this time, the applicant has not 
submitted any new relevant documentation that was not already 
considered by the Board.  

DPSID was still unable to verify the applicant served with a 
unit that received award of the PUC while he was assigned to the 
unit or that he qualified as “expert” in small-arms marksmanship 
with either the M-16 rifle or issue handgun.  The applicant’s 
foreign service time of 3 months and 24 days does not meet the 
criteria of an aggregate of 6 months in the area of eligibility 
for award of the VCM.  To grant relief would be contrary to the 
criteria established by DODM 1348.33, Manual of Military 
Decorations and Awards, the Secretary of the Air Force and the 
Chief of Staff.  

Based on a review of the applicant’s official military personnel 
record, DPSID was able to determine the applicant should have 
been awarded the AFOUA and the NDSM for his service from 
11 August 1966 to 10 August 1970.  The NDSM is annotated on his 
DD Form 214; therefore no update of this award is required.  
Upon the Board’s final decision, administrative correction of 
the applicant’s record will be completed by AFPC/DPSOR for award 
of the AFOUA.  

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


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

His DD Form 214 indicates 3 months and 24 days; he asks 
acknowledgment of what campaign periods this represents.  Once 
verified, the two campaign periods will support for an aggregate 
of 6 months qualifying him for the VCM.  

He notes the ribbon bar reflects the AM.  He has enclosed a 
description for the event in support for the AFOUA and the 
Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross for award of the AM.  

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, 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.  We have thoroughly reviewed the evidence of record and 
considered the weight and relevance of the additional 
documentation provided by the applicant, and whether or not it 
was discoverable at the time of any previous application.  
However, since no new and relevant evidence has been provided, 
we find the requests for award of the PUC, VCM, SAEMR and the AM 
do not meet the criteria for reconsideration.  As the applicant 
has been previously advised, reconsideration is provided only 
where newly discovered relevant evidence is presented which was 
not available when the application was submitted.  Further, the 
reiteration of facts we have previously addressed, 
uncorroborated personal observations, or additional arguments on 
the evidence of record are not adequate grounds for reopening a 
case.  Therefore, in view of the above and in the absence of new 
and relevant evidence, we find no basis to reconsider the 
applicant’s request.


THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the additional evidence presented did 
not meet the criteria for reconsideration by the Board; 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-2014-03600 in Executive Session on 10 June 2015 under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	 , Panel Chair
	 , Member
	 , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Forms 149, dated 27 August 2014, 
			  23 October 2014 and 23 March 2015, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Record of Proceedings, BC-2013-04172, dated
			  1 August 2014.
	Exhibit D.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 17 December 2014.
	Exhibit E.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSID, dated 12 February 2015,
			  w/atch.  
	Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 March 2015.
	Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 31 March 2015, 
			  w/atchs.