RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02024 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His rank listed on his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, issued 28 Jan 14, in Block 4a/b, Grade, Rate or Rank/Pay Grade, be changed to Staff Sergeant (SSgt/E-5). APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: In Accordance With (IAW) Title 10 U.S.C. § 1372, Grade on retirement for Physical Disability: members of Armed Forces unless entitled to a higher retired grade under some other provision of law, any member of an Armed Force who is retired for physical disability under section 1201 or 1204 of this title,…is entitled to the grade equivalent to the highest permanent regular or reserve grade to which he would have been promoted had it not been for the physical disability for which he is retired and which was found to exist as a result of a physical examination. His E-5 promotion sequence number was 7138 on the 2013 E5 Promotion List. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 2 Mar 10, the applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force. The applicant’s DD Form 214, issued on 28 Jan 14, reflects the highest grade held on his last day of active duty as Senior Airman (SrA/E-4). On 29 Jan 14, the applicant was disability retired with a compensable rating of 40 percent in the grade of SSgt. He was credited with 3 years, 10 months, and 27 days of active service. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial indicating that he became ineligible for promotion and did not hold that rank prior to placement on the TDRL. The applicant was considered and tentatively selected for promotion to the grade of SSgt during cycle 13E5. He received Promotion Sequence Number (PSN) 7138.0 which would have incremented 1 Apr 14; however, he was found unfit for further military service by the Secretary of the Air Force (SAF), on 28 Aug 13, and was permanently disability retired effective 29 Jan 14. In accordance with AFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion Program, Table 1.1, Rule 7, airmen are ineligible for promotion in a particular cycle if they have been determined by SAF to be unfit to perform the duties of their grade because of physical disability. When promotion eligibility status (PES) code "L" was updated in the system effective 28 Aug 13, the applicant's projected promotion was removed. In accordance with AFI 36-3212, Physical Evaluation for Retention, Retirement, and Separation, paragraph 5.15.4., members who are retired on or after 23 Sep 96 may be retired in the regular or reserve grade to which they had been selected and would have been promoted had it not been for the physical disability for which they were retired. This is for retirement and pay purposes only. The DD Form 214 reflects the active duty grade the member held at time of retirement. The retirement order also reflects this rank as "highest grade held on active duty: SRA." The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPFD recommends denial, indicating the preponderance of evidence reflects that no error or injustice occurred during the disability process. The applicant was selected for promotion to SSgt during cycle 13E5 with a sequence number of 7138.0 which would have incremented on 1 Apr 14. IAW 10 USC 1372, our retirement order ACD-03244, 30 Aug 13, pertaining to the applicant's permanent disability retirement effective 29 Jan 14 reflects the projected higher grade of SSgt as the retired grade. The DD Form 214 is correct as the applicant had not worn the rank of SSgt prior to his date of separation. The complete DPFD evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluation were forwarded to the applicant on 17 Nov 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). As of this date, no response has been received by this office. 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. 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 of injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief. 4. The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. 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-2014-02024 in Executive Session on 11 Mar 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-02024 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 12 May 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Pertinent Excerpts from Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 2 Jul 14. Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPFD, dated 14 Oct 14. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Nov 14.