RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-01236
		INDEX CODE:  100.00
		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be amended to reflect the pay grade of staff sergeant (SSgt) rather than senior airman and to add DFAS Accounting School to block 14.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The requested items were omitted or are incorrect on his DD Form 214.

In support of his request, the applicant provided a copy of an amendment to the order placing him on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) and a copy of his DD Form 214.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant entered active duty on 11 December 2001 and was placed on the TDRL on 20 January 2007.  On 26 January 2007, an amendment to the order placing him on the TDRL was issued to show he was retired in the grade of SSgt.  He served 5 years, 1 month and 9 days on active duty.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPWB recommends denial.  DPPPWB states the applicant was selected for promotion to SSgt during cycle 06E5 (promotions effective September 2006 through August 2007).  He received promotion sequence number 3,022 which incremented 1 November 2006.  Since he had not completed Airmen Leadership School (ALS) prior to his pin-on date, his promotion was placed in withhold pending completion of Professional Military Education (PME).  In accordance with AFI 36-2502, paragraph 1.12., airmen selected for promotion to SSgt, master sergeant (MSgt), or chief master sergeant (CMSgt) must complete in-residence PME before assuming these grades.  The Personnel Data System (PDS) automatically withholds promotion for those who do not complete appropriate PME prior to the effective date.  Should the applicant be found fit for duty at a later date and choose to return to active duty, he will be required to complete ALS prior to pinning on the rank of SSgt.

The complete DPPPWB evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPAT recommends denial.  DPPAT states On 22 June 2007, they requested additional documentation or evidence to show completion of the DFAS Accounting School.  The applicant did not respond to the request within the allotted 30 days.  The applicant has not provided proof of course completion.

The complete DPPAT evaluation is at Exhibit D.  

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 12 October 2007, the evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).  As of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

AADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSD states the applicant was selected for promotion to SSgt during cycle 06E5.  Amendment SO ACD-00565, dated 26 January 2007 pertaining to applicant's placement on the temporary retired file, effective 20 January 2007 reflects he retired in the projected higher grade of SSgt.  His DD Form 214 is correct as he had not worn the rank of SSgt prior to his date of separation.  His records reflect that he was medically separated from the service and retired in the grade of SSgt.

The complete DPSD evaluation is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 21 February 2008, the evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit G).  As of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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 an injustice.  The applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, after reviewing the evidence of record we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of an 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-2007-01236 in Executive Session on 15 May 2008 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

			XXXXXXXXXX, Panel Chair
			XXXXXXXXXX, Member
			XXXXXXXXXX, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 February 2007, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 9 July 2007.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPAT, dated 8 August 2007.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 October 2007.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, AFPC/DPSD, dated 25 January 2008.
   Exhibit G.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 21 February 2008.

			XXXXXXXXXX
			Panel Chair