RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-01133 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be amended to reflect the grade of chief master sergeant (CMSgt) rather than senior master sergeant (SMSgt). _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: While reviewing burial benefits he discovered his grade was incorrect on his separation documents. In support of his request, the applicant provides documents extracted from his military personnel records. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Documents provided by the applicant reflect he was transferred to the Retired Reserve on 30 October 1993 in the grade of SMSgt effective and with a date of rank of 1 November 1991. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1POE recommends denial. A1POE states the applicant provides what appears to be a brevet promotion certificate awarding him the “honorary rank” of chief master sergeant on the California National Guard Retired List. The authority for such promotions usually lies within the state military law and is not recognized by the Air National Guard or Air Force Reserves. His NGB Form 22 and Special Order AD-860 both list his grade as SMSgt; his retirement order dated 11 January 2002 also shows the grade of SMSgt. A1PS concurs with NGB/A1POE’s advisory. The A1POE and A1PS complete evaluation is at Exhibit B. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 17 December 2010, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit C). 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 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. The applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force offices 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 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-2010-01133 in Executive Session on 19 January 2011, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-01133 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 11 February 2010, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letters, NGB/A1POE and NGB/A1PS, dated 2 December 2010 and 3 December 2010. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 December 2010.