RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04115 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His rank of A/1C (airman first class) be changed to reflect “sergeant” on his NGB Form 22, Report of Separation/Discharge and Record of Service. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He performed duties as a “sergeant” and no one ever told him it would be temporary. He served with honor and feels this is unjust. The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The available records reflect the applicant served in the New Jersey Air National Guard from 14 Dec 50 to 13 Dec 53. The applicant was promoted to private on 4 May 51, corporal on 15 Dec 51. On 8 May 52, he received a temporary promotion to A/2C with an effective date of 1 May 52, and on 1 Jun 52, he was promoted to the grade of A/1C. The applicant’s DD Form 214, Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States, issued in conjunction with his 1 Oct 52 separation reflects the rank of A/1C(T) and his NGB Form 22, Report of Separation and Record of Service, issued with his 13 Dec 53 separation reflect the rank of A/1C. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: NGB/A1POE recommends denial. A1POE states the applicant has not provided any documentation to show that an error or injustice occurred. Further, at the time of the applicant’s discharge, there was no enlisted grade of “sergeant.” In April 1952, the titles of the Air Force ranks changed to restrict the non-commissioned officer status to a select few and the rank of sergeant (E-4) went away. The new title for an E-4 was airman first class and the next grade was staff sergeant (E-5). The complete A1POE 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 7 Jan 11 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, this office has not received a 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 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 the 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 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 Docket Number BC-2010-04115 in Executive Session on 12 April 2011, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 Oct 10. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, NGB/A1POE, dated 8 Dec 10. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Jan 11.