RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:                DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2014-02536
				COUNSEL:  NONE
				HEARING DESIRED:  NO



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active 
Duty, be corrected to reflect the following:

1.  Item 5a - Staff Sergeant (SSgt) rather than Sergeant (Sgt) 
and Item 5b – E5 rather than E4.

2.  Item 9 - 28 February 1943 rather than 23 February 1943 – 
ADMINISTRATIVELY CORRECTED.

3.  Item 21 – Cortland Co., New York, rather than Cortland Co., 
Texas – ADMINISTRATIVELY CORRECTED.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was promoted to the rank of SSgt one day prior to his 
discharge.

The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A.


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 3 November 
1964.

The applicant was promoted to the rank of Sgt effective 
1 February 1967.

On 2 October 1968, the applicant was honorably released from 
active duty and transferred to the Air Force Reserve in the 
grade of Sgt under the provisions of AFM 39-10.  He served 
3 years and 11 months on active duty and credited with 11 months 
and 24 days of foreign and/or service.


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial.  DPSOE states the applicant was 
never promoted to the rank of SSgt while serving in the Regular 
Air Force.  Upon discharge from the Regular Air Force, the 
applicant was transferred to the Air Force Reserve to complete 
his six year service obligation.  The DD Form 214 reflects the 
applicant’s rank as Sgt at the time of discharge from regular 
active duty whereas the Reserve order, reflecting the rank of 
SSgt - is the rank he obtained while serving in the Air Force 
Reserve.  A DD Form 214 is not accomplished upon discharge from 
the Reserve.  

The DPSOE complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 17 November 2014, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was 
forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 
30 days (Exhibit D).  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 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 an 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 
(OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion 
the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  
We note the Air Force OPR will correct the two items noted above 
on the DD 214. Therefore, other than the administrative 
corrections cited above, we find no basis to recommend granting 
any additional relief sought in this application.




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-2014-02536 in Executive Session on 5 February 2015, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:


The following documentary evidence was considered:

  Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 13 June 2014, w/atchs.
  Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Available Master Personnel Records.
  Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 1 October 2014.
  Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 November 2014.