RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00966 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. He be entitled to the Air Force Longevity Service Award (AFLSA). (Administratively Corrected). 2. He be entitled to award of the Republic of Vietnam Gallantry Cross with Palm (RVNGC w/P) and the Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal (RVCM). (Administratively Corrected). 3. He be entitled to the award of the Presidential Unit Citation (PUC). 4. He be credited with boots on the ground in the Republic of Vietnam. ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was told that he should have been awarded the PUC for his service in Thailand from Dec 65 to Dec 66. His record should indicate that he had “boots on ground” in Vietnam because he was at Da Nang Air Base in Dec 65 and Dec 66. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal statement; copies of his DD-214, Report of Transfer or Discharge, issued in conjunction with his 7 Dec 66 separation, and other documentation associated with his service in the United States Navy. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Based on the available record, the applicant was released from active duty, effective 7 Dec 66. He was credited with 5 years, 4 months, and 4 days of active service, including 1 year and 20 days of foreign service. The applicant’s record was administratively corrected to reflect his entitlement to the RVNGC w/P, the RVCM, the Vietnam Service Medal with three bronze service stars (VSM w/3BSS and the Air Force Outstanding Unit Award with Valor (AFOUA w/V). On 21 July 2011, DPSIDR advised the applicant that his unit (432 Supply Squadron) was not awarded the PUC during his tour of duty therefore he is not eligible. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force. ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPAPP recommends denial of the applicant’s request for boots on ground in Vietnam. They note that based on the provided information and the master personnel record, they did not find any information that reflects the applicant served in Vietnam. They were able to verify boots on ground in Thailand based on the applicant’s service from 15 Nov 65 to 15 Nov 66. The complete AFPC/DPAPP evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 9 Dec 11 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). ________________________________________________________________ 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 warranting corrective action in regard to the applicant’s entitlement to the PUC and boots on the ground in Vietnam. 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 and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that relief beyond that already granted administratively is not warranted. In addition, we note that the applicant was advised by letter, dated 21 Jul 11, that his organization did not receive the PUC during the time he was assigned, therefore, we did not find any evidence that the applicant was entitled to the requested award. In view of the above, we find no basis to favorably consider this portion of his application. ________________________________________________________________ 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-2011-00966 in Executive Session on 7 February 2012, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 7 Mar 11, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPAPP, dated 16 Jun 11, w/atchs. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Dec11. Panel Chair