RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04039 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her retirement rank be adjusted to reflect Master Sergeant (MSgt/E-7). ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Her grade of Technical Sergeant (TSgt/E-6) should be adjusted to her highest grade held, MSgt. The error occurred when her records were transferred to the retirement section at the Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC). They obviously did not recognize her highest grade obtained was MSgt. She took an administrative reduction without prejudice in order to take a job in the Arkansas Air National Guard (ARANG). In support of her appeal, the applicant provides copies of her assignment orders to the ARANG and her promotion order to the grade of MSgt. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 28 Jul 13, the applicant was relieved from the ARANG with a compensable disability rating of 60 percent, in the grade of TSgt, and retired under 10 U.S.C. § 1204. She was credited with 16 years, 11 months, and 24 days of active service for retirement. ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1PP recommends approval of the applicant's request to have her retired grade adjusted to MSgt rather than TSgt. In accordance with the governing directive is AFI 36-3209, Separation and Retirement Procedures for Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve Members, the applicant was demoted without prejudice from MSgt to TSgt on 5 Dec 05. This demotion was required for the applicant to transfer to a different position within the ARANG. Per AFI 36-3209, section 5.18.7., “a member is entitled to be placed on the retired list established by Title 10 U.S.C., § 8966, Retired Lists, in the highest grade served satisfactorily." The complete A1PP evaluation 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 6 Dec 13 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). ________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) recommends approval of the applicant’s request “for severance pay [emphasis added} in the higher grade of MSgt/E-7”. There was no evidence of misconduct in the 3 years, 8 months the applicant held the higher grade of MSgt, and her demotion to the grade of TSgt was voluntary based on her reassignment to a lower graded position. The complete SAFPC evaluation is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: By Electronic Mail (E-mail), the applicant concurred with the recommendation from SAFPC. The applicant’s complete response 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 timely filed. 3. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. We have carefully reviewed this application and note the advisories from both NGB and SAFPC have partially misanalysed the requested relief (e.g. citing incorrect authority for disability retirements and misanalysing as a disability separation vs disability retirement, respectively). Nonetheless, we agree with their analysis of the equities and the recommended relief. In our view, the evidence of record accurately reflects the applicant served satisfactorily in the higher grade, prior to taking a demotion, without prejudice. Generally, members retiring or separating for disability do so in the grade in which they are serving. However, members may be eligible to retire or separate in a higher grade if they served satisfactorily in a higher grade. SAFPC normally makes this determination, but apparently they weren’t consulted. Based on the record before us and SAFPC’s rationale (albeit on an advisory for disability separation vs retirement), we conclude the applicant should have been retired in the higher grade of MSgt rather than TSgt. Accordingly, we recommend the applicant’s record be corrected to the extent indicated below. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that effective 29 Jul 13, she was retired in the grade of Master Sergeant (E-7) rather than Technical Sergeant (E-6). ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-04039 in Executive Session on 8 Jul 14 and 2 Feb 15, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member All members voted to correct the record as recommended. The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-04039 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Aug 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Available Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, NGB/A1PP, dated 2 Oct 13. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Dec 13. Exhibit E. Letter, SAFPC, dated 7 Jan 15. Exhibit F. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 16 Jan 15. Exhibit G. Electronic Mail, Applicant, dated 20 Jan 15.