Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05129
Original file (BC 2013 05129.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-05129
		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty, be changed to reflect his rank as technical sergeant (E-6), 
instead of staff sergeant (E-5).


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His unit/organization failed to process his amended retirement 
order prior to his retirement.

In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his DD 
Form 214, amended and original retirement orders.

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


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 26 Oct 79, the applicant enlisted in the Puerto Rico Air 
National Guard (PRANG).
On 9 Aug 89, the applicant was honorably discharged from the PRANG 
and transferred to the Air Force Reserve, effective 10 Aug 89.
On 24 Aug 06, the applicant was demoted from the grade of 
technical sergeant (E-6) to staff sergeant (E-5), with a date of 
rank of 18 May 89, effective 15 Aug 06.
On 8 Jun 12, the applicant was released from active duty upon 
completion of required active service in the grade of staff 
sergeant (E-5).
On 24 Apr 13, the Secretary of the Air Force (SECAF) directed the 
applicant be permanently disability retired from active service 
with a physical disability rating of 60 percent.
On 28 May 13, the applicant was relieved from active duty and 
permanently disability retired in the grade of technical sergeant 
(E-6) with a physical disability rating of 60 percent, effective 
29 May 13.



AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
	
ARPC/DPTS recommends denial indicating there was no evidence of an 
error or injustice.  The applicant was a staff sergeant (E-5) at 
the time of his last active duty period of service from 10 Jul 
06 to 8 Jun 12.  On 15 Aug 06, he was administratively demoted to 
the grade of E-5 and was not on active duty upon his placement on 
the Permanent Disability for Retirement Listing (PDRL).  On 29 May 
13, he effectively retired with the highest grade held as an E-6.

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


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant 
on 10 Jan 14 for review and comment within 30 days.  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 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 an 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 office of primary responsibility 
and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the 
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  
Therefore, 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-2013-05129 in Executive Session on 28 Aug 14, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

		                    , Panel Chair
		                 , Member
		                  , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Oct 13, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Available Master Personnel Records
	Exhibit C.  Letter, ARPC/DPTS, dated 20 Dec 13, w/atch.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Jan 14.

						 

3

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04102

    Original file (BC-2010-04102.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 22 Jan 03, the applicant was reduced in grade from technical sergeant to staff sergeant, with a new date of rank of 21 Nov 02, as a result of an Article 15, due to government travel card (GTC) misuse. SAFPC has reviewed this application, and determined the applicant served satisfactorily in the grade of technical sergeant and should be advanced on the retired list in the grade of technical sergeant when he reaches 30 years of active service. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1999 | 9702556

    Original file (9702556.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Military Personnel Division, , reviewed this application and noted that a review of the demotion actions against the applicant indicated he was demoted from technical sergeant (TSgt) to staff sergeant (SSgt), under the authority of Article 15 action, effective 23 May 94, for dereliction of duty. The evidence of record reflects that the applicant was reduced from the grade of technical sergeant to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9702580

    Original file (9702580.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On or about 22 Nov 85, he failed to progress satisfactorily in the Air Force WMP by gaining 10 pounds instead of losing the 5 pounds required. On 30 Jan 89, the commander, Air Refueling Wing, , received the proposed demotion case against the applicant and agreed with the applicant’s commander that demotion action was appropriate, effective 30 Jan 89. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The BCMR Medical Consultant reviewed this application...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03259

    Original file (BC-2005-03259.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Title 10 USC, Section 1407(f)(2)(B), states if an enlisted member was at any time reduced in grade as the result of a court-martial sentence, nonjudicial punishment, or an administrative action, unless the member was subsequently promoted to a higher enlisted grade, the computation of retired pay is determined under Title 10 USC, Section 1406, Retired pay base for members who first became members before September 1980: final basic pay. The applicant further contends the demotion was invalid...

  • 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 | CY2003 | BC-2002-01786

    Original file (BC-2002-01786.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-01786 INDEX CODES: 108.00, 131.09 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect that he was medically retired in the grade of technical sergeant, the highest grade he held in the Air Force, with a disability rating of 75 percent. Under the Air Force system (Title...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9702235

    Original file (9702235.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. 97-02235 The Retirement Ops Section, AFPC/DPPRR, also reviewed this application and states that applicant is correctly projected to retire in the grade of technical sergeant, which is the grade he is holding on the date of his retirement. c. The applicant’s retirement order, DAFSO AC-014238, 15 Aug 97 (Atch 4), reflects he will be relieved from active duty on 3 1 Jan 98 and retired 1 Feb 98 with 20 years, 05 months, and 23 days for...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03646

    Original file (BC 2013 03646.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ 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. 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00909

    Original file (BC-2007-00909.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The ARPC/A1B complete evaluation is at Exhibit B. AFCAF/PS has stated that after a review of the Joint Personnel Adjudication System (JPAS), the applicant’s security clearance eligibility is coded as “Loss of Jurisdiction,” not suspended. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Jun 07. Exhibit D. Memorandum, AFCAF/PS, dated 14 Aug 07.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-01876

    Original file (BC-2012-01876.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01876 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her service points be updated and corrected. DPT indicates that if it is the Board’s decision to grant the relief sought, then the applicant’s record should be corrected to award 20 paid active duty points for a school tour from 14 January 2006 to 3...