Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00583
Original file (BC-2011-00583.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00583 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

Her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty, be corrected to reflect she was retired in the grade of 
technical sergeant (TSgt), rather than staff sergeant (SSgt). 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

Although her DD Form 214 reflects she was Temporary Disability 
Retired, she was permanently disability retired due to Lupus in 
the grade of TSgt. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission, including attachment, is at 
Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained 
in the letters prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air 
Force, which are at Exhibits C and D. Accordingly, there is no 
need to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial of the applicant’s request to have 
her rank, as reflected on her DD Form 214, corrected to reflect 
she held the grade of technical sergeant when she was transferred 
to the TDRL. The applicant was considered and tentatively 
selected for promotion to the grade of technical sergeant during 
cycle 08E6 and received promotion sequence number 7910.0 which 
would have incremented on 1 Jul 09; however, she was found unfit 
for further military service on 3 Jul 08 and placed on the TDRL 
in the grade of staff sergeant, effective 12 Sep 08. She was 
subsequently permanently disability retired, effective 14 Jul 10, 
in the grade of technical sergeant. In accordance with AFI 36-
2502, airmen are ineligible for promotion in a particular cycle 
if they have been determined to be unfit for continued military 


service. Furthermore, service members who are retired on or 
after 23 Sep 96 may be retired in the regular or reserve grade 
that they had been selected and would have been promoted had they 
not been retired due to a physical disability; this is for 
retirement pay purposes only. The applicant’s DD Form 214 
accurately reflects the grades she held at the time of her 
discharge and transfer to the TDRL, and subsequent permanent 
disability retirement. 

 

The complete AFPC/DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

HQ AFPC/DPPD recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence 
of an error or injustice. The applicant was selected for 
promotion to TSgt, but was unable to pin on the higher grade due 
to her being found unfit for continued military service due to a 
physical disability. She was retired in the grade of TSgt for 
retired pay purposes and her DD Form 214 accurately reflects the 
grade she held while on active duty and was wearing at the time 
of separation. 

 

The complete AFPC/DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 
8 Apr 11 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, 
no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E). 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

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. After careful 
consideration of the applicant's request and the available 
evidence of record, we find insufficient evidence of error or 
injustice to warrant corrective action. The facts and opinions 
stated in the advisory opinion appear to be based on the evidence 
of record and have not been adequately rebutted by applicant. 
Absent persuasive evidence applicant was denied rights to which 
she was entitled, appropriate regulations were not followed, or 
appropriate standards were not applied, we find no basis to 
disturb the existing record. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

 


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 AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2011-00583 in Executive Session on 18 Oct 11, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 Feb 11, w/atch. 

 Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 9 Mar 11. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 28 Mar 11. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Apr 11. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 

 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01852

    Original file (BC-2011-01852.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPD recommends denial. The complete DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-01852 in Executive Session on 1 November 2011 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | BC-1998-01992

    Original file (BC-1998-01992.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-01992 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His retirement grade be changed to technical sergeant (TSgt). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, Enlisted Promotion & Mil Testing Branch, AFPC/DPPPWB, reviewed the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9801992

    Original file (9801992.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-01992 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His retirement grade be changed to technical sergeant (TSgt). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief Inquiries/AFBCMR Section, Enlisted Promotion & Mil Testing Branch, AFPC/DPPPWB, reviewed the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03741

    Original file (BC 2013 03741.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 Exhibits C and D. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. Prior to the amendment to the law, members were retired in the grade they held on their date of separation. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9703383

    Original file (9703383.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The appropriate Air Force offices evaluated applicant's request and provided advisory opinions to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). At the time she was placed on TDRL, promotion testing was being conducted for the 96E6 cycle. Although she is requesting supplemental promotion consideration to TSgt for the 97E6 cycle, she was ineligible for consideration because she was not on active duty.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-03146

    Original file (BC-2009-03146.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    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/DPPD recommends denial of the applicant’s request to have his rank changed on his DD Form 214. The complete DPPD evaluation is at Exhibit C. BCMR MEDICAL CONSULTANT’S EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03464

    Original file (BC 2013 03464.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Her current Date of Rank (DOR) be changed from 1 June 2013, to 28 May 2009; the date she reentered the Regular Air Force 3. They reaccomplished the applicant’s Total Active Federal Military Service (TAFMS)_ evaluation worksheet based upon her updated point credit summary report and deemed that she still does not meet the requirements in accordance with AFI 36- 2002, Regular Air Force and Special Category Accessions, paragraph Attachment 4, paragraph A4.2, Prior Service (PS) Date of Rank and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01328

    Original file (BC-2004-01328.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01328 INDEX CODES: 121.02, 131.09 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her records be corrected to reflect she was promoted to the grade of staff sergeant (SSgt) effective 1 Mar 99; and, she receive back pay from 1 Mar 99 until the date her name was placed on the Temporary Disability Retired...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02251

    Original file (BC 2014 02251.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    She was advised by members of the Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC) the grade of staff sergeant (E-5) would be recorded on her DD Form 214. The DD Form 214 reflects the active duty grade the member held at time of retirement and the retirement order also reflects this rank as “highest grade held on active duty,” which was senior airman (E-4). The DD Form 214 is correct in this case, as it reflects the highest grade held while on active duty and the retirement order is also correct, in that...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03057

    Original file (BC-2010-03057.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-03057 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) rendered for the period 2 July 2009 through 15 April 2010 be voided and removed from her records. The following is a resume of the applicant’s EPR profile: PERIOD ENDING PROMOTION RECOMMENDATION 20 Dec 01 (SrA)...