Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-01080
Original file (BC-2010-01080.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01080 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His date of rank (DOR) to staff sergeant (SSgt) be changed from 
1 January 1969 to 20 July 1967 and he receive back pay. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

His DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of 
Transfer or Discharge, reflected his DOR for SSgt as 20 July 
1967. He has two special orders with conflicting information. 
His DOR should be 20 July 1967. 

 

During a deployment to Pueblo, he was told he should be wearing 
SSgt stripes. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his 
special orders and his DD Forms 214. 

 

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

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant enlisted in Air Force Reserve on 26 January 1968 
and was progressively promoted to the grade of SSgt, having 
assumed that grade effective and with a date of rank of 1 January 
1969. 

 

Special Order A-5, dated 1 January 1969, indicates the applicant 
was promoted to the grade of SSgt, effective 1 January 1968, with 
a DOR of 1 January 1969. Special Order A-24, dated 6 January 
1969, amended Special Order A-5 to change his effective date to 
1 January 1969. His DD Form 214 reflects his DOR to SSgt as 
20 July 1967 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

 

 

 


 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFRC/A1K recommends denial. A1K states the applicant’s DD Form 
214 and the source documentation should match; however, based on 
the source documentation, it is reasonable to conclude the 
applicant’s DD Form 214 is in error and not the source 
documentation. The applicant’s special orders reflect the 
applicant’s DOR as 1 January 1969. 

 

The complete A1K evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The applicant states there must be a source document somewhere in 
order for his DD Form 214 to reflect he was promoted to SSgt in 
1967. He performed duties as assigned and should be compensated 
for the time he was activated as a SSgt. 

 

His DD Form 214 is a true record of his military service. He 
respectfully request the Board abide by the DOR reflected on the 
DD Form 214, with compensation accordingly. 

 

The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit D. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 that would 
warrant corrective action. After a thorough review of the 
available evidence and the applicant’s complete submission, we 
find no evidence which would lead us to believe the applicant's 
date of rank (DOR) should be corrected to show he was promoted to 
the grade of staff sergeant effective 20 July 1967. While the 
applicant believes his DOR should be changed to match his DD Form 
214 and that he should be compensated accordingly, we do not find 
the evidence presented sufficiently persuasive to override the 
rationale provided by the Air Force office of primary 
responsibility (OPR). Therefore, we agree with the opinion and 
recommendation of the Air Force OPR and adopt its rationale as 
the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the 
victim of an error or injustice. Absent persuasive evidence that 


he was denied rights to which he was entitled, 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 Docket Number 2010-
01080 in Executive Session on 5 January 2011, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 Panel Chair 

 Member 

Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 Mar 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit B. Letter, ARPC/A1K, dated 16 May 10. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Jun 10. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 6 Jul 10. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03132

    Original file (BC-2011-03132.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant’s DD Form 214 does not reflect that he was awarded a VSM W/1BSS or PUC. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that he was discharged on 19 February 1970, with a pay grade of E-5, rather than E-4. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03279

    Original file (BC 2013 03279.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 8 November 2011, the applicant’s DD Form 4 and DD Form 1966 were corrected to reflect he entered the Air Force in the pay grade of E-2. Based on the corrected enlistment documents, on 3 September 2012, the applicant should have entered IADT in the rank of Airman (Amn, E-2), with the Time-in- Grade (TIG) effective as of that date. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that: a.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00670

    Original file (BC 2014 00670.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of his requests, the applicant provides a personal statement, copies of his AF Form IMT 348, Informal Line of Duty Determination (LOD); AF Form 422, Notification of Air Force Member’s Qualification Status; AF Form 469, Duty Limiting Condition Report; Reserve Order A-150, memorandums and various other documents associated with his requests. The Air Force Military Personnel Data System reflects the applicant is ineligible to reenlist due to “Poor Fitness Score.” AIR FORCE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05725

    Original file (BC 2013 05725.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The application has not been filed within the three-year time limitation imposed by Air Force Instruction 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records. Promotion boards selected individuals and the quotas received determined the number that could be promoted. Based on his DOR to Sgt, he would have been eligible for promotion consideration to the grade of SSgt beginning in 1969.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05285

    Original file (BC 2013 05285.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    According to Mil Form 88, Record of Proceedings under Article 15, WCMJ, on 17 June 2010, the Assistant Adjutant General imposed nonjudicial punishment on the applicant who was reduced from the rank of MSgt to the rank of SSgt effective 17 June 2010. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In a memorandum dated 6 January 2014, NGB/A1PP recommends correcting the applicant’s records to reflect his retirement rank as TSgt. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-05059

    Original file (BC-2012-05059.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    She had a break in service from 4 Nov 10 until 14 Jan 11, at which time she reenlisted in the Reserve. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFRC/A1K recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. Therefore, the applicant’s correct...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00253

    Original file (BC 2013 00253.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    No other document in his entire record with a date of 1 January 1971, until the date of retirement reflects the rank of TSgt. There are no promotion orders in his record to validate a promotion to the rank of TSgt. The applicant's retirement order, Special Order AC-07219, dated 24 February 1971, shows his rank as SSgt, with the highest rank held on active duty as SSgt.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01630

    Original file (BC 2014 01630.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01630 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Date of Rank (DOR) to the grade of Senior Airman (SrA) be changed from 5 Mar 14 to 13 Jan 14. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is included at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 04177

    Original file (BC 2014 04177.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-04177 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, Item 12h (Effective Date of Pay Grade), be corrected. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. The applicant entered active duty 5 April 1971 and was promoted to SSgt with a date of rank (DOR) and effective date of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03171

    Original file (BC-2010-03171.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: At the time of his enlistment, he was advised that he would be enlisting as an E-3 (airman first class) under the Stripes for Unit Bonus Skills. 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 office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the...