RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-03425

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

By amendment, his effective date of advancement to the grade of master sergeant on the retired list be changed to his original date of advancement to the grade of master sergeant.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Upon his retirement, he was advised by his squadron commander to apply for a change to the effective date of his promotion to the grade of master sergeant from 31 May 02 to his current effective date of retirement of 31 May 92.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a copy of his retiree account statement.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant initially enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 6 Oct 70 for a period of four years.

On 14 Jan 92, he received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 for operating a passenger vehicle while drunk.  He was reduced in grade from master sergeant to technical sergeant and ordered to forfeit $850 per month for two months.

On 14 Jan 92, the applicant submitted an application for voluntary retirement requesting an effective date of 1 Jun 92.  On 16 Jan 92, he submitted an application to change the requested retirement date from 1 Jun 92 to 1 May 92.

On 24 Jan 92, the portion of the nonjudicial punishment which called for forfeitures in excess of $425 per month for two months was set aside.

On 20 Feb 92, the Secretary of the Air Force found that the applicant served satisfactorily in the higher grade of master sergeant within the meaning of Section 8964, Title 10, United States Code (USC), and directed his advancement to that grade on the retired list the date of completion of all required service.

On 30 Apr 92, the applicant was relieved from active duty and retired, effective 1 May 92, in the grade of technical sergeant, with 21 years, 6 months, and 25 days of active service.

Effective 6 Oct 00, the applicant was advanced to the grade of master sergeant on the retired list by reason of completing 30 years service on 5 Oct 00.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPRRP recommended denial indicating that the law which allows for advancement of enlisted members of the Air Force, when their active service plus service on the retired list total 30 years, is very specific in its application and intent.  On 20 Feb 92, a determination was made that the applicant did serve satisfactorily on active duty in the higher grade of master sergeant within the meaning of Section 8964, Title 10, USC.  The applicant’s Total Active Military Service Date (TAFMSD) was 6 Oct 70.  He completed all required service on 5 Oct 00 and was advanced to the grade of master sergeant on 6 Oct 00.  In AFPC/DPPRRP’s view, all criteria of the pertinent laws have been met in this regard and no error or injustice occurred in the applicant’s retirement, grade determination, or advancement action.

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPPRRP evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and furnished a response indicating his initial request was in error and that his current grade of advancement to the grade of master sergeant should be changed to his original date of advancement to master sergeant, which was 1 Sep 90.

Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  The applicant's complete submission was thoroughly reviewed, and his contentions were duly noted.  However, we do not find the applicant’s assertions and the documentation presented in support of his appeal sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force office of primary responsibility.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence that the applicant’s effective date of advancement to the grade of master sergeant on the retired list was erroneous, we adopt the Air Force rationale and conclude that no basis exists 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-03425 in Executive Session on 10 Feb 04, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 31 Sep 03, w/atch.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPRRP, dated 25 Nov 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Dec 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, applicant, dated 15 Dec 03.