RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01558 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect award of the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM). APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The VSM was not reflected on his DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 24 Aug 65, the applicant commenced his enlistment in the Regular Air Force. According to the Consolidated Base Personnel Office (CBPO) form for verification for Vietnam service, it appears the applicant self-certified that he was on temporary duty (TDY) in Vietnam from 15 Oct 67-29 Oct 67 (Cam Rhan Bay (RVN)), 6 Nov-10 Nov 67 (Bangkok, Thailand), 4 Jan-4 Feb (Tuy Hoa (RVN)), and 17 May 68- 31 May 68 (Cam Rhan Bay (RVN)). The form further reflects the number of combat missions flown over North Vietnam as 100. On 20 Jan 69, the applicant was furnished an honorable discharge, and was credited with 3 years, 4 months and 27 days of active service. On 22 Jul 14, AFPC/DPAPP notified the applicant that his foreign service boots on ground in Thailand, Taiwan, and Vietnam had been verified. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSID recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. The VSM is awarded to all service members of the United States Armed Forces who served in Vietnam between 4 Jul 65 and 28 Mar 73 in the area of eligibility (AOE). The AOE is defined as Vietnam, its contiguous waters, or airspace there-over; in Thailand, Laos, or Cambodia, their contiguous waters, or the airspaces there-over, and in direct support of operations in Vietnam. To be eligible, a service member must have served on TDY for 30 consecutive or 60 non- consecutive days. These time limitations may be waived for personnel who participated in actual combat operations. There is no evidence in the applicant’s official records to support he served in the area of responsibility (AOR) for award of the VSM. Furthermore, there was no evidence located in the applicant’s submission or his official military personnel record to support he served in an area of eligibility (AOE) for 30 consecutive or 60 nonconsecutive days. A complete copy of the AFPC/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 6 Jan 15 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 not been the victim of an error of injustice. While there is a copy of a form in the applicant’s records that appears to be for the purpose of verifying deployed service in the Southeast Asia area of responsibility, without any other form of corroborating records, this form, which appears to be the applicant’s self-certification of his deployed service, in and of itself, is not sufficient for us to conclude that he performed the requisite deployed service to earn the VSM. Should the applicant provide additional corroborating documentation, it may warrant reconsideration of his request based on new evidence. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, 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-2014-01558 in Executive Session on 24 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 3 Apr 14, w/atch. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSID, dated 24 Nov 14. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Jan 15.