ADDENDUM TO RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03203 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be given credit for his service in Vietnam and other parts of Southeast Asia (SEA). ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 30 April 2013, the Board considered and denied the applicant’s request for service in Vietnam. In addition, the applicant’s record was administratively corrected to reflect award of the Korean Defense Service Medal (KDSM) and the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (AFEM) - Korea. For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s service, and, the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings, with attachments, at Exhibit F. In a letter, dated 30 April 2013, the applicant requested reconsideration of his appeal. His letter notes that he was seeking information from other members of his former unit who could validate his service in Korea and Vietnam. In addition, he clarified a statement he made in his inquiry to his Member of Congress, where he states, “reference to delivering materials to DaNang AB in Vietnam.” He did not deliver supplies from Korea to DaNang as indicated; however, he first flew from Osan AB in Korea to Tachicawa AB in Japan where the supplies were loaded on the aircraft for delivery to DaNang. He provided another letter, dated 9 May 2013, noting that one of his commanding officers in Korea had passed away and felt that he might have run out of options. He notes his unbelief as to the lack of historical records kept by the Air Force air rescue squadrons and his desire to be acknowledged for his entire service. In a letter, dated 30 July 2013, states that he finds it hard to accept the wording “that there was no material error or injustice,” when his entire story is filled with mismanagement of his personnel records. Upon an objective review of his case one would conclude that the Air Force made continuous administrative errors from the moment he departed from Pease AFB until the moment he arrived back in the USA seven months later. He notes the incorrect statements in the Record of Proceedings; however, the applicant did not depart from Goose Air Base but left from Pease AFB, on 28 Jan 68. He questions the comments in the Record of Proceedings and does not understand some of the information as it relates to the DD Form 149; e.g., making a personal appearance, etc. By letter, dated 13 September 2013, he requests a corrected Record of Proceedings. He notes that the Air Force acknowledges that he was present in Korea; however, it cannot account for why he was there or the unit he worked at. This is a fairness issue for him. He understands that he would be eligible for Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) health care coverage if his missing records documented any of the time he spent in Vietnam. Since the Air Force is responsible for his records missing, he does not understand why a decision cannot be made to acknowledge the error and his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, revised to reflect his true service. In his electronic mail, dated 24 Jan 14, the applicant noted that the Air Force acknowledges that he qualified for the small arms marksmanship ribbon and while he has no way to prove it, his commander had asked him to become familiar with a pistol he provided him and he qualified as an expert small arms marksman at Da Nang Vietnam. In addition, he was informed that his immunization records should reflect that he was given shots for medications specific to Korea and Vietnam. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibits G through L. ________________________________________________________________ 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. In an earlier finding, the Board determined there was insufficient evidence to warrant corrective action. We have reviewed the new information provided in support of the applicant’s request and do not find the evidence provided sufficient to overcome our earlier assessment of the case. We note that the applicant challenges some of the information contained in the previous Record of Proceedings (ROP) and questions whether he received a fair review of his case. However, the evidence reflects that the applicant’s request was denied due to insufficient evidence to substantiate service in Southeast Asia. Therefore, we conclude that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of proof that he has been the victim of an error or injustice. In view of the above and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, 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 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-2012-03203 in Executive Session on 18 Dec 13 and 29 Jan 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit F. Record of Proceedings, dated 12 May 13, w/atchs. Exhibit G. Letter, Applicant, dated 30 Apr 13, w/atchs. Exhibit H. Letter, Applicant, dated 9 May 13. Exhibit I. Letter, Applicant, dated 30 Jul 13. Exhibit J. Letter, Applicant, dated 13 Sep 13. Exhibit K. Letter, Applicant, dated 2 Jan 14. Exhibit L. Electronic Mail, dated 24 Jan 14. Panel Chair