Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01540
Original file (BC-2005-01540.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-01540
            INDEX CODE:  110.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE:  10 NOVEMBER 2006

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His DD Form 214 be  corrected  to  reflect  his  rank  as  E-5  (Staff
Sergeant) versus E-4 (Sergeant).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Recent paperwork from  St  Louis  MO  indicates  he  is  an  honorably
discharged staff sergeant.  His  DD  Form  214  says  he  was  an  E-4
Sergeant.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a  personal  statement,  a
copy of his Certificate of Military Service, and a copy of his DD Form
214.

Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on  15  June  1982  for  a
period of six years.  He was progressively promoted to  the  grade  of
senior airman on 29 November 1984,  and  appointed  a  Noncommissioned
Officer in the grade of sergeant on 1 November 1985.  He received five
Airman Performance Reports (APRs) closing  9  August  1983,  9  August
1984, 9 August 1985, 30 June 1986,  and  30 June  1987  of  which  the
overall evaluations were “8,” “8,” “9,” “9,” and “9.”

Applicant received an Article 15 dated  24  September  1982,  for  the
following:  On or about 20 September 1982,  he  was  derelict  in  the
performance of his duties in that he willfully failed  to  prohibit  a
female member from visiting his assigned dormitory room, as it was his
duty to do.  Punishment consisted of forfeiture of $50.00 of his pay.

Applicant was released from active duty under the provisions of AFR 39-
10, Early Separation Program--Strength Reduction on  2 March  1988  in
the grade of E-4 (Sergeant).  He had served 5 years, 8 months  and  18
days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPWB states a review of the applicant’s record reveals  he  was
considered and nonselected for promotion to Staff Sergeant five  times
before his separation on 2 March 1988.   They  therefore  must  assume
that the copy of his Certificate of Military Service is in  error  and
his DD Form 214 is correct.  As a matter of information, the  rank  of
Sergeant (Sgt) was not terminated/redesignated as Senior Airman  (SrA)
until 2 May 1991.  Therefore, they  recommend  denial  of  applicant’s
request.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 3 June 2005, a copy of the Air Force evaluation  was  forwarded  to
the applicant for review and response within  30  days.   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  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
and adopt their rationale as the basis for  the  conclusion  that  the
applicant  has  not  been  the  victim  of  an  error  or   injustice.
Therefore, 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  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 28 July 2005, under the  provisions  of  AFI  36-
2603:

                       Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
                       Ms. Renee M. Collier, Member
                       Mr. Terry L. Scott, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 May 05, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 23 May 05.
      Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Jun 05.




                             KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
                             Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00261

    Original file (BC-2005-00261.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPWB recommends denial of the applicant’s request that his rank of SSgt be restored. Additionally, the applicant has not provided any evidence to support his contentions of sexual discrimination. The applicant has provided no evidence with successfully disputes HQ AFPC/DPPPWB’s interpretation of the regulation or showing that he was unjustly treated in regards to his rank at the time of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02242

    Original file (BC-2005-02242.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Public Law (PL) 101-689 was established to allow those servicemembers who entered active duty from 1 July 1985 through 30 June 1988, who declined participation in the MGIB upon entry on active duty, another opportunity to enroll during the open period. The evidence of record indicates the applicant was afforded the opportunity to enroll in the MGIB in 1985 and again in 1989 and declined participation on both occasions. Therefore, in view of the foregoing, and in the absence of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01020

    Original file (BC-2004-01020.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPPWB recommends the application be denied. An exception to policy skill level waiver request was submitted and approved on 6 November 2003. We have seen no evidence showing the applicant was not provided fair and equitable promotion consideration in accordance with existing policy and procedures.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2004-03628

    Original file (BC-2004-03628.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He notes he had served with the Regular Air Force for a year and three months prior to serving with the Air National Guard (ANG). _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant, a former member of the Louisiana Air National Guard (LAANG) began his military career in the Regular Air Force on 20 April 1984. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00640

    Original file (BC-2003-00640.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    She enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 21 January 1985 and was released from active duty on 5 April 1988 and transferred to the Reserves of the Air Force on 6 April 1988 and discharged on 3 February 1999. The evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 30 May 2003, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days. The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01325

    Original file (BC-2005-01325.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His DD Form 214 should reflect the rank of airman first class, he completed 3 years of high school, he was awarded the ARCOM, the GCM and his AFSC should be 90250. Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. The DPPPWB’s evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPAC recommends denial.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03560

    Original file (BC-2005-03560.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant completed 25 days in correctional custody. In an application to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) dated 21 August 2001, the applicant requested his general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM Panel Chair AFBCMR BC-2005-03560 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | bc-2005-00158

    Original file (bc-2005-00158.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    However, on 16 May 05, HQ AFPC/DPPAE advised the applicant that his 2H RE code was erroneous and had been administratively changed to 4E (grade is airman, airman basic, or A1C and the member has completed more than 31 months of service) - See Exhibit C. [Note: The 4E RE code is a waiverable code; i.e., if a member has an in-demand skill and is otherwise eligible, the Reserves may waive the immediate reenlistment impediment and accept him.] ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01667

    Original file (BC-2005-01667.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    They also find no promotion order indicating he was ever selected for promotion prior to retirement AFPC/DPPPWB’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 5 August 2005 for review and response. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-03019

    Original file (BC-2005-03019.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-03091 INDEX CODE: 110.02 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 4 APRIL 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be changed to reflect that she was discharged for medical reasons. Review of the service personnel and medical records...