RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02834 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty, be corrected to show the following: 

 

1. Block 11, Primary Specialty Number, Title `and Years and 
months in specialty, 42730 – Aircrew Egress Systems Technician , 
20 years, be changed to T42339, Master Instructor Electrical 
Superintendent. 

 

2. Block 13, Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign 
ribbons awarded or authorized be changed to reflect his Master 
Instructor Badge, Supervisory Maintenance Badge, and an Oak Leaf 
Cluster to his NCO Professional Military Education Graduation 
Ribbon, his Associates Degree, a course from his CCAF 
transcript. 

 

3 Block 15, Member Contributed to Post-Vietnam Era Veterans 
Educational Assistance Program (VEAP), be changed to yes. 

 

4. He be awarded the fourth Oak Leaf Cluster (OLC) to his Air 
Force Longevity Service Medal (AFLSA). (ADMINISTRATELY 
CORRECTED) 

 

5. He be awarded the USAF Combat Readiness Medal (CRM). 

 

6. He be awarded the Vietnam Campaign Medal (RVCM). 

 

7. He be awarded the Vietnam Service Medal (VSM). 

 

8. He be awarded the Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal (AFEM). 

 

9. He be awarded the Presidential Unit Citation. (ADMINISTRATIVELY CORRECTED) 

 

10. He be awarded any other medals to which he is entitled. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He hopes, after many months of trying, to get his military 
records corrected. He does not understand why his 


accomplishments were not correctly documented. He is proud of 
his service and wants his children and grandchildren to be 
proud. He has submitted documentation to prove his request. 

 

In support of his appeal, the applicant provides several 
personal statements, his DD Form 214 and other supporting 
documentation. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant is a former member of the Air Force who served 
from 2 November 1967 to 30 November 1987 when he was honorably 
retired. 

 

By letter dated 10 January 2012, AFPC/DPSIT notified the 
applicant that additional information was needed to show he 
contributed to VEAP in order to change his DD Form 214. 
Specifically, he should submit evidence showing he contributed 
$1200.00 to VEAP. (See Exhibit D.) 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate Air Force 
offices of primary responsibility which are at Exhibits 
C through G. 

 

_______________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSIM recommends denial. AFI 36-2903, Dress and Appearance 
of Air Force Personnel Program, states the Master Instructor 
Badge is a military badge of the USAF and only worn while 
performing assigned duties. The member provided documentation 
that he completed the course; however, the badge is only worn 
while performing duties. 

 

The complete DPSIM evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial of the applicant’s request for the 
Silver Hourglass device for his AFLSA, 2nd OLC for his NCOPMEGR, 
VSM w/BSS, RVCM, AFRM, AFEM and the CRM. The applicant’s 
records were reviewed and his entitlement to the AFLSA w/4OLC 
was verified. His records will be updated accordingly. 

 

The Silver Hourglass device is authorized for the Armed Forces 
Reserve Medal to indicate 20 years of reserve service. It is 
not authorized for the AFLSA. The applicant is ineligible for 
the award of the Silver Hourglass device for his AFLSA. 

 


The NCOPMEGR is awarded to graduates of certified Professional 
Military Education Schools and each successive level entitles 
members to an oak leaf cluster. The ribbon is not awarded to 
members who complete the correspondence course only. The 
applicant provided a copy of a certificate of completion from 
the USAF Senior NCO Academy Independent Study. However, that 
course is not authorized for recognition by an oak leaf cluster 
for the NCOPMEGR and the applicant is not eligible for a second 
oak leaf cluster. 

 

The VSM is awarded to all service members of the Armed Forces 
who, between 4 July 1958 and 28 March 1973, served in the 
following areas of Southeast Asia: Vietnam and the contiguous 
waters and airspace, Thailand, Laos or Cambodia or the airspace 
thereof and in direct support of military operations in Vietnam. 
A BSS is awarded for participation in each recognized campaign. 
The applicant served in Thailand from 2 November 1974 to 
4 August 1975, after the inclusive period for the VSM. The 
applicant is ineligible for the VSM and BSS. 

 

The RVCM is awarded to members of the Armed Forces of the United 
States who served for 6 months in South Vietnam during the 
period 1 March 1961 and 28 March 1973, or served outside the 
geographical limits of South Vietnam and contributed direct 
combat support to Vietnam for an aggregate of 6 months. The 
applicant’s service in Thailand began on 2 November 1974, after 
the close of the inclusive period for the RVCM. The applicant 
is ineligible for the RVCM. 

 

DPSIDR was unable to locate an award titled Armed Forces Medal. 
The applicant may have referred to the Armed Forces Reserve 
Medal. The applicant’s records do not indicate service with 
reserve components. He is ineligible for the AFRM. 

 

The AFEM is awarded to members of the Armed Forces who, after 
1 July 1958, participated as members of the military units in a 
U.S. military operation in significant numbers encounter during 
such participation foreign armed opposition; or are otherwise 
placed in such a position that hostile action by foreign armed 
forces was imminent even though it did not materialize. There 
were no operations for the AFEM that included Portugal, Turkey 
or Aviano, Italy. He is not eligible for the AFEM for his 
temporary duty assignments. 

 

During the applicant’s assignment to Thailand, there were three 
AFEM operations in Southeast Asia. However, there is no 
documentation verifying he deployed to the area of operations 
during his assignment. He is not eligible for the AFEM for his 
assignment to Thailand. 

 

The CRM is an individual award for periods of qualifying service 
in combat or mission ready status for direct weapons system 
employment. For purposes of this award, direct weapons systems 
employment is defined as an aircrew whose wartime mission places 


them into enemy territory. The applicant was not assigned as a 
member of an aircrew, in missile operations or in direct control 
of in-flight manned aircraft. He is ineligible for the award of 
the CRM. 

 

The applicant does not meet the criteria for the award of the 
Silver Hourglass, NCOPMEGR w/2OLC, VSM, RVCM, Armed Forces 
Medal, AFEM and the CRM. 

 

The complete DPSIDR evaluation is at Exhibit E. 

 

AFPC/DPSIDC recommends denial. The applicant requests Block 11 
of his DD Form 214 be changed to reflect T42399, Master 
Instructor and Aircraft Electrical Superintendent. The 
applicant’s DD Form 214 was corrected to read 42370 Aircraft 
Electrical Technician, 20 years. 

 

The applicant has not submitted documentation to support a 
change in his AFSC or skill level. The award of the 9 skill 
level is awarded when the member has been a master sergeant for 
a minimum of 12 months, posses a 7-skill level, is recommended 
by a supervisor and completes the Senior NCO Academy 
correspondence course. After all requirements are met, an 
AF Form 2096, Classification or On-the-Job Training Action, a P-
Series Order or PCIII generated AFSC action notice serves as the 
source document to award an AFSC. 

 

Additionally, the applicant requests the T-prefix be added to 
his AFSC. The “T”, Technical Training Instructor, is awarded 
and affixed to the AFSC in which duty is being performed when 
qualification as a technical training instructor has been 
demonstrated. It is retained as long as the member remains 
qualified. They are unable to verify an error in the 
applicant’s AFSC. 

 

The complete DPSIDC evaluation, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit F. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The applicant reiterated the errors on his DD Form 214. He 
states he did not receive one of the referenced letters and that 
his records should be corrected as requested. 

 

The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit H. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 available evidence of record and the applicant's 
complete submission, to include his response to the Air Force 
advisories, in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree 
with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force offices of 
primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis 
for our conclusion that relief beyond that already 
administratively granted is not warranted. Therefore, in the 
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to grant 
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 BCMR Docket Number 
BC-2011-02834 in Executive Session on 30 August 2012, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence pertaining to BCMR Docket 
Number BC-2011-02834 was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A1. DD Form 149, dated 11 Jul 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit A2. DD Form 149, dated 8 Sep 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit A3. DD Form 149, dated 8 Oct 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit A4. DD Form 149, dated 9 Oct 11, w/atchs. 

Exhibit A5. DD Form 149, dated 13 Oct 11, w/atchs. 

Exhibit A6. DD Form 149, dated 14 Oct 11, w/atchs. 

Exhibit A7. DD Form 149, dated 28 Oct 11, w/atchs. 

Exhibit A8. DD Form 149, dated 9 Nov 11, w/atchs. 

Exhibit A9. DD Form 149, dated 23 Feb 12, w/atchs. 

 

Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIM, dated 7 Oct 11. 


 Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSIT, dated 10 Jan 12. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, AFPC/DPSIDR, dated 30 Jan 12. 

 Exhibit F. Letter, AFPC/DPSIDC, dated 27 Feb 12, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit G. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Mar 12. 

 Exhibit H. Letter, Applicant’s Response, undated, w/atchs. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair