RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03646 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be changed to reflect her rank as staff sergeant (E-5), instead of senior airman (E-4). ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: According to a letter from the Secretary of the Air Force (SECAF), she served satisfactorily in the higher grade of staff sergeant (E-5), in accordance with 10 U.S.C. § 1212. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant’s military personnel records indicate she enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 1 Mar 00. On 24 Mar 11, the applicant was administratively demoted to the grade of senior airman (E-4), with a new date of rank of 2 Feb 11, in accordance with Air Force Instruction 36-2502, Airman Promotion/Demotion Programs, paragraph 6.3.4, Failure to fulfill Responsibilities. On 24 May 11, a review was conducted by the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council (SAFPC) under the authority delegated by the SECAF, and determined the applicant did serve satisfactorily in the higher grade of staff sergeant (E-5). On 25 May 11, because of this finding, the SECAF found therefore be entitled to disability severance pay in that grade under the provisions of 10 USC § 1212. On 1 Jun 11, the SECAF directed the applicant be separated from active service with a physical disability rating of 20 percent for left hip pain and low back pain. On 31 Aug 11, the applicant was honorably discharged in the grade of senior airman (E-4) for physical disability with entitlement to disability severance pay and was credited with 11 years and 6 months of total active service. 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 Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial indicating there was no evidence of an error or injustice. The applicant did not hold the grade of staff sergeant (E-5) at the time of her separation from active duty. She was promoted to E-5, effective 1 Sep 06, and on 24 Mar 11, was administratively demoted to the grade of senior airman (E-4), with a new date of rank of 2 Feb 11. She was honorably discharged in the rank of staff sergeant, effective 31 Aug 11, but this was for severance pay purposes only. The DD Form 214 reflects the grade the member held while on active duty at the time of separation. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The adverse action taken during her last year of service was too harsh. The time for her name to be removed from the control roster, which was a result of a Letter of Reprimand (LOR), was steadily approaching at the time she received her demotion action. She provided copies of documents, to include a LOR, dated 8 Dec 10, denied permissive TDY request, and an approved application for Air Force Reserve membership, which she believes shows some inconsistencies in the actions taken against her by her former commander. After receiving her first LOR, she visited the Inspector General’s office to sign acknowledgement of Whistleblower Rights. She also went to the Area Defense Counsel for assistance with writing her rebuttal to the second LOR she received. Additionally, she has also provided a copy of her AF IMT 1288, Application for Ready Reserve Assignment, indicating her attempt to seek further consideration to become a military member under the Reserve capacity. Lastly, she provided two character statements indicating their support of granting her request (Exhibit E). ________________________________________________________________ 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. The applicant contends her administrative demotion was disproportionate to the circumstances and cites a finding by SAFPC indicating that she served successfully in the grade of staff sergeant (E-5) in support of her request. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s complete submission, to include her rebuttal response, we are not convinced that she has been the victim of an error or injustice. While the applicant believes the SAFPC finding that she served successfully in the higher grade somehow indicates that her administrative demotion was erroneous, lacked a sufficient basis, or was disproportionate to the circumstances, we are not convinced the applicant is the victim of an error or injustice. In this respect, we note that SAFPC’s finding the applicant successfully served in the higher grade was made for the sole purpose of computing the applicant’s disability benefits should she be retired or separated for physical disability. Such a finding permits the Air Force to disability retirement or severance pay using the higher grade, rather than the grade held on the last day the applicant was on active duty. Therefore, we do not find the documentation presented or the applicant’s arguments sufficient to conclude that her administrative demotion lacked a sufficient basis, was disproportionate to the circumstances, or represented an abuse of discretionary authority. Therefore, in view of the above and in 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 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-2013-03646 in Executive Session on 29 Apr 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 Jul 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 6 Sep 13. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Nov 13. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 13 Dec 13, w/atchs. Panel Chair