RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01497 (Case 2)
INDEX CODE: 131.09
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be advanced to the grade of major on the Retired List.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The Board should reexamine his previously approved case where the
Board directed he be advanced to the grade of captain (O-3E) on the
United States Air Force Retired List. He should be advanced on the
Retired List to the grade of major.
In support of his request, the applicant submits a personal statement
and additional documents associated with the issues cited in his
contentions. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments,
is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 13 Jun 63, the applicant submitted a voluntary application for
retirement, requesting to be retired on 31 Aug 63, or the earliest
practicable date thereafter. On 31 Aug 63, the applicant was relieved
from active duty and was retired in the grade of Chief Warrant Officer
(CWO)-W3 on 1 Sep 63. He had completed 22 years and 24 days of active
service for retirement. The applicant’s Retirement Order, dated 22
Jul 63, reflects his assignment in the Retired Reserve Section in the
Reserve grade of major.
On 17 Jul 00, the AFBCMR considered and granted the applicant's
request to be advanced to the grade of captain (O-3E) on the Retired
List.
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 at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPRRP recommends the application be denied. DPPRRP stated
that Section 8964, Title 10, USC, allows the advancement of warrant
officers of the Air Force (when their active service plus service on
the retired list totals 30 years) on the retired list to the highest
grade in which they served on active duty satisfactorily as determined
by the Secretary of the Air Force. The Secretary of the Air Force has
delegated this authority to the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel
Council (SAF/PC). On 16 Feb 72, SAF/PC approved a grade determination
for advancement to the grade of captain, which is the highest grade
applicant served while on active duty. This advancement determination
was subsequently revoked on 21 Jun 72 due to retired pay computations.
However, the advancement determination to the grade of captain (O-3E)
was later upheld and reestablished to be effective on 7 Aug 71 through
an AFBCMR appeal on 17 Jul 00.
DPPRRP found no documentation in the applicant’s master personnel
records that show he ever served on active duty in the grade of major.
There is documentation showing that the applicant served
satisfactorily on active duty in the grade of captain from 17 Jan 52
to 31 Aug 53. Although the applicant does hold the Reserve grade of
major, he has never served on active duty in any higher grade than
captain. The applicant was advanced to the grade of captain on the
USAF Retired List, which was the highest grade he served on active
duty. There are no other provisions of law that would allow for
advancement of warrant officers. All criteria of the pertinent law
(Section 8964) were met in this regard and no error or injustice
occurred in the grade determination or advancement action.
The HQ AFPC/DPPRRP evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 10
May 2002 for review and response. 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 timely filed.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate
the existence of error or injustice. His contentions are duly noted;
however, we do not find these uncorroborated assertions, in and by
themselves sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided
by the Air Force office of primary responsibility. The evidence of
record reveals that the highest grade in which the applicant served on
active duty was as a captain. Although the applicant does hold the
Reserve grade of major, no evidence has been presented to show he
served on active duty in the grade of major. In view of the
foregoing, we are in agreement with the opinion and recommendation of
the Air Force office of primary responsibility and conclude that the
applicant has failed to sustain his burden that he has suffered either
an error or injustice. In the absence of sufficient evidence to the
contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief
sought in this application.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the
application was denied without a personal appearance; and that 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 this application in
Executive Session on 31 October 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Ms. Charlene M. Bradley, Panel Chair
Mr. John E. B. Smith, Member
Mr. Frederick R. Beaman III, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 Feb 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRRP, dated 2 Apr 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 May 02.
CHARLENE M. BRADLEY
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-01708
On 28 Aug 01, the convening authority approved only so much of the sentence as provided for the reduction and forfeitures. JAJM stated that the applicant was an NCO with almost 20 years of service at the time he provided a urine sample that tested positive for the presence of a metabolite of marijuana. There are no other provisions of law that would allow for advancement of enlisted members.
On 1 Feb 89, the applicant retired under the provisions of AFR 35-7 (Voluntary-Retirement For Years of Service Established By Law) with an honorable characterization of service in the grade of staff sergeant. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Special Programs Section, AFPC/DPPRRP, reviewed this application and indicated that Section 8961, Title 10, USC, states, “Unless entitled to a higher retired grade under some other provision of law, a Regular or Reserve of the Air Force....who retires other...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01345
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01345 INDEX CODE: 131.09 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His retirement grade of senior airman (E-4) be changed to reflect technical sergeant (E-6) and that he receive consideration for reinstatement to the grade of master sergeant (E-7). A Monthly Retirement Pay Estimate was introduced into...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2001-01286A
The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit H. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Pursuant to the Board’s request for an audit of the applicant’s service record, HQ AFPC/DPPAOR reviewed the applicant’s master personnel record and found the DD Form 13, Statement of Service, to be correct. Although his flight records during the period in question reflect the grade of captain and that, on 26 June 1957, he was separated from active...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-04005
On 17 Oct 03, the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAF/PC) considered the applicant's case and determined that he did not serve satisfactorily in the grade of master sergeant and did not warrant advancement on the Retired list. We find no evidence of error in this case, and after thoroughly reviewing the documentation provided in support of his appeal, we do not believe he has been the victim of an injustice. The Board notes that the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-02159
The applicant being an enlisted member at the time of his retirement was retired under the law that applies to Air Force enlisted members. While he did serve on active duty as a commissioned officer from 3 May 79 to 15 Aug 85, he was not entitled to retire as an officer because he had less than 10 years of active commissioned service as required by the applicable law. Applicant wants to know how someone can be retired as an officer and serve on active duty as an enlisted member.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03970
On 22 Dec 82, he received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 for financial irresponsibility and was reduced in grade from staff sergeant to sergeant. In their view, the Tower Amendment was not applicable to the applicant because he was reduced in grade prior to completion of 20 years of active service. In order for the applicant to have been eligible for retirement pay recalculation under the Tower Amendment, he would have needed 20 years of active service at the time he held the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00209
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: (BC-2003-00209) INDEX NUMBER: 128.00 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: None XXX-XX-XXXX HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The date of his retirement order, special order AC-023248, dated 20 Aug 02, be changed to 1 Jun 02 so that the Air Force will pay for his final move upon leaving the Air Force. He submitted his...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03387
He be retired in the grade of captain (O3-E) effective 8 Jan 07, the date he will have eight years of commissioned service. Second, the timing of these statements are fatal to applicant’s claim that he relied on the alleged erroneous retirement pay advice he received from DFAS on 28 Oct 05, and from the DM retirement and benefits office on 4 Jan 06. The complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-00781
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFRC/A1B recommends denial indicating the applicant’s retirement in the grade of captain was in compliance with the governing instruction and they found no occurrence of an error or injustice. A complete copy of the AFRC/A1B evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Counsel indicates the advisory opinion did...