RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-03646

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty, be changed to reflect her rank as staff sergeant (E-5), 
instead of senior airman (E-4).

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

According to a letter from the Secretary of the Air Force 
(SECAF), she served satisfactorily in the higher grade of staff 
sergeant (E-5), in accordance with 10 U.S.C. § 1212.

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant’s military personnel records indicate she enlisted 
in the Regular Air Force on 1 Mar 00.

On 24 Mar 11, the applicant was administratively demoted to the 
grade of senior airman (E-4), with a new date of rank of 2 Feb 
11, in accordance with Air Force Instruction 36-2502, Airman 
Promotion/Demotion Programs, paragraph 6.3.4, Failure to fulfill 
Responsibilities.

On 24 May 11, a review was conducted by the Secretary of the Air 
Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) under the authority delegated by 
the SECAF, and determined the applicant did serve satisfactorily 
in the higher grade of staff sergeant (E-5).

On 25 May 11, because of this finding, the SECAF found therefore 
be entitled to disability severance pay in that grade under the 
provisions of 10 USC § 1212.

On 1 Jun 11, the SECAF directed the applicant be separated from 
active service with a physical disability rating of 20 percent 
for left hip pain and low back pain.

On 31 Aug 11, the applicant was honorably discharged in the 
grade of senior airman (E-4) for physical disability with 
entitlement to disability severance pay and was credited with 11 
years and 6 months of total active service.

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:

AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial indicating there was no evidence of 
an error or injustice.  The applicant did not hold the grade of 
staff sergeant (E-5) at the time of her separation from active 
duty.  She was promoted to E-5, effective 1 Sep 06, and on 24 
Mar 11, was administratively demoted to the grade of senior 
airman (E-4), with a new date of rank of 2 Feb 11.  She was 
honorably discharged in the rank of staff sergeant, effective 31 
Aug 11, but this was for severance pay purposes only.  The DD 
Form 214 reflects the grade the member held while on active duty 
at the time of separation.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The adverse action taken during her last year of service was too 
harsh.  The time for her name to be removed from the control 
roster, which was a result of a Letter of Reprimand (LOR), was 
steadily approaching at the time she received her demotion 
action.  She provided copies of documents, to include a LOR, 
dated 8 Dec 10, denied permissive TDY request, and an approved 
application for Air Force Reserve membership, which she believes 
shows some inconsistencies in the actions taken against her by 
her former commander.  After receiving her first LOR, she 
visited the Inspector General’s office to sign acknowledgement 
of Whistleblower Rights.  She also went to the Area Defense 
Counsel for assistance with writing her rebuttal to the second 
LOR she received.  Additionally, she has also provided a copy of 
her AF IMT 1288, Application for Ready Reserve Assignment, 
indicating her attempt to seek further consideration to become a 
military member under the Reserve capacity.  Lastly, she 
provided two character statements indicating their support of 
granting her request (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 an error or injustice.  The 
applicant contends her administrative demotion was 
disproportionate to the circumstances and cites a finding by 
SAFPC indicating that she served successfully in the grade of 
staff sergeant (E-5) in support of her request.  After a 
thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s 
complete submission, to include her rebuttal response, we are 
not convinced that she has been the victim of an error or 
injustice.  While the applicant believes the SAFPC finding that 
she served successfully in the higher grade somehow indicates 
that her administrative demotion was erroneous, lacked a 
sufficient basis, or was disproportionate to the circumstances, 
we are not convinced the applicant is the victim of an error or 
injustice.  In this respect, we note that SAFPC’s finding the 
applicant successfully served in the higher grade was made for 
the sole purpose of computing the applicant’s disability 
benefits should she be retired or separated for physical 
disability.  Such a finding permits the Air Force to disability 
retirement or severance pay using the higher grade, rather than 
the grade held on the last day the applicant was on active duty.  
Therefore, we do not find the documentation presented or the 
applicant’s arguments sufficient to conclude that her 
administrative demotion lacked a sufficient basis, was 
disproportionate to the circumstances, or represented an abuse 
of discretionary authority.  Therefore, in view of the above and 
in 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 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-2013-03646 in Executive Session on 29 Apr 14, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	                        , Panel Chair
	                       , Member
	                        , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 20 Jul 13, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 6 Sep 13.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Nov 13.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 13 Dec 13, w/atchs.




                                   
                                   Panel Chair
                                    
4