RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02024
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His rank listed on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or
Discharge from Active Duty, issued 28 Jan 14, in Block 4a/b,
Grade, Rate or Rank/Pay Grade, be changed to Staff Sergeant
(SSgt/E-5).
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
In Accordance With (IAW) Title 10 U.S.C. § 1372, Grade on
retirement for Physical Disability: members of Armed Forces
unless entitled to a higher retired grade under some other
provision of law, any member of an Armed Force who is retired
for physical disability under section 1201 or 1204 of this
title,
is entitled to the grade equivalent to the highest
permanent regular or reserve grade to which he would have been
promoted had it not been for the physical disability for which
he is retired and which was found to exist as a result of a
physical examination.
His E-5 promotion sequence number was 7138 on the 2013 E5
Promotion List.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 2 Mar 10, the applicant initially entered the Regular Air
Force.
The applicants DD Form 214, issued on 28 Jan 14, reflects the
highest grade held on his last day of active duty as Senior
Airman (SrA/E-4).
On 29 Jan 14, the applicant was disability retired with a
compensable rating of 40 percent in the grade of SSgt. He was
credited with 3 years, 10 months, and 27 days of active service.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial indicating that he became
ineligible for promotion and did not hold that rank prior to
placement on the TDRL.
The applicant was considered and tentatively selected for
promotion to the grade of SSgt during cycle 13E5. He received
Promotion Sequence Number (PSN) 7138.0 which would have
incremented 1 Apr 14; however, he was found unfit for further
military service by the Secretary of the Air Force (SAF), on
28 Aug 13, and was permanently disability retired effective
29 Jan 14.
In accordance with AFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion Program, Table
1.1, Rule 7, airmen are ineligible for promotion in a particular
cycle if they have been determined by SAF to be unfit to perform
the duties of their grade because of physical disability. When
promotion eligibility status (PES) code "L" was updated in the
system effective 28 Aug 13, the applicant's projected promotion
was removed.
In accordance with AFI 36-3212, Physical Evaluation for
Retention, Retirement, and Separation, paragraph 5.15.4.,
members who are retired on or after 23 Sep 96 may be retired in
the regular or reserve grade to which they had been selected and
would have been promoted had it not been for the physical
disability for which they were retired. This is for retirement
and pay purposes only. The DD Form 214 reflects the active duty
grade the member held at time of retirement. The retirement
order also reflects this rank as "highest grade held on active
duty: SRA."
The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPFD recommends denial, indicating the preponderance of
evidence reflects that no error or injustice occurred during the
disability process.
The applicant was selected for promotion to SSgt during cycle
13E5 with a sequence number of 7138.0 which would have
incremented on 1 Apr 14. IAW 10 USC 1372, our retirement order
ACD-03244, 30 Aug 13, pertaining to the applicant's permanent
disability retirement effective 29 Jan 14 reflects the projected
higher grade of SSgt as the retired grade. The DD Form 214 is
correct as the applicant had not worn the rank of SSgt prior to
his date of separation.
The complete DPFD evaluation is at Exhibit D.
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluation were forwarded to the
applicant on 17 Nov 14 for review and comment within 30 days
(Exhibit E). 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 timely filed.
3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. We took
notice of the applicants 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 of injustice.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find
no basis to recommend granting the requested relief.
4. The applicants case is adequately documented and it has not
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel
will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably
considered.
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-2014-02024 in Executive Session on 11 Mar 15 under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2014-02024 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 May 14, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Pertinent Excerpts from Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 2 Jul 14.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPFD, dated 14 Oct 14.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Nov 14.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03741
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 | CY2014 | BC 2014 01708
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01708 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His rank listed on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, issued 3 Dec 07, in Block 4a/b, Grade, Rate or Rank/Pay Grade, be changed to Staff Sergeant (SSgt/E-5). His untimely application should be considered in the interest of justice because he received a form from the Physical...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02764
On 4 Aug 11, the applicant waived his right to a formal hearing and requested the Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB) decide his case based on the medical records alone. According to Special Order ACD-93289 dated 1 Sep 11, effective 21 Sep 11, the applicant was removed from the TDRL and discharged in the grade of SSgt by reason of physical disability with entitlement to disability severance pay. When a member is removed from TDRL, a new DD Form 214 is not issued as the time spent on...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02251
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 | CY2014 | BC 2014 03124
He was not given his Weighted Airman Promotion System (WAPS) study material in a timely manner to prepare for his promotion test. The Promotion Eligibility Cut-Off Date (PECD) for promotion cycle 13E5 was 31 Mar 13. We took notice of the applicants 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 the rationale expressed as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00350
According to the 99 ABW Commanders letter dated 4 Dec 13, she was issued a written no-contact order on 8 Feb 13 by the First Sergeant to stay away from another member of the 99 LRS per a request from Security Forces investigators because the applicant was discussing the open investigation with the said person. The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 28 Jul 14, copies of...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00583
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). ...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02502
His records be corrected to show that he is now and was promotion eligible during the time he was placed on a Control Roster. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIM evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B. AFPC/DPSOA recommends closing the case, since the applicant's record currently reflects his requested actions and they do not have the history, nor are they the OPR for control roster actions; however, based on the information provided the previous RE code 4I would have been a result of...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-02080
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-02080 INDEX CODE: 131.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, blocks 4a and 4b be changed to read Staff Sergeant (SSgt) and E5, respectively. However, he became ineligible for promotion when the Secretary of the Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 00756
The board should still consider whether the Control Roster which was issued not only for the contested FA failure, but also for two additional FA failures should be removed. HQ AFPC/DPSIDE administratively corrected the applicants EPR (by voiding the report) for the period 12 Aug 08 through 11 Apr 10, and replacing it with an AF Form 77 stating not rated for the time period, report was removed by order of Chief of Staff of the Air Force. Additionally, this action resulted in the...