RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-02856 COUNSEL: NONE XXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. She be reinstated to the rank of Chief Master Sergeant (CMSgt, E-9). 2. All demotion paperwork be removed from her records. 3. She receive all back pay. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The Air Force Instructions used as the reason for her demotion were obsolete or not applicable to Air Force Reserve members, thereby causing the demotion to be invalid. AFI 36-2503, Administrative Demotion of Airmen, has been obsolete since 31 Dec 2009. Moreover, the authority for the demotion action was AFI 36-2502, Airman Promotion Programs, which only applies to active duty service members and not Air Force Reserve personnel. In support of her request, the applicant provides copies of Notification of Demotion Action under AFI 36-2503 memorandum, Acknowledgment of Notification, Reserve Order P-10 dated 3 Dec 2010 and various other documents associated with her request. Her complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is currently serving in the Air Force Reserve in the rank of Senior Master Sergeant (SMSgt, E-8). She was demoted to the rank of SMSgt with a date of rank of 2 Oct 2010, for failing to fulfill her Senior Noncommissioned Officer (SNCO) responsibilities. ________________________________________________________________ ? AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFRC/JA recommends denial. JA states that the applicant claims her demotion was improperly processed because AFI 36-2503, which was cited in her notification memorandum was not in effect at that time and that AFI 36-2502, which was cited in her demotion order did not apply to reservists. The applicant failed to fulfill her SNCO responsibilities; therefore demotion action was taken. This action was taken following the procedures laid out in AFI 36-2503 and AFI 36-2502 as verbally directed by the AFRC/CC under the authority granted him by AFPD 36-25, Military Promotion and Demotion. Her entire military record was reviewed by both the demotion authority and the demotion appellate authority. This demotion action is appropriate under the circumstances. The Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) previously addressed this issue in Docket Number BC-2012-02002. Air Force Reserve enlisted members are promoted and demoted in accordance with the Air Force Reserve enlisted Promotion and Demotion Policy, which is executed in accordance with AFPD 36- 25. Further, AFI 33-360, Publications and Forms Management, para 2.8.2, states "AFPDs and AF supplements to DoDDs may only be directly implemented by AFIs and AFMANs. However, if no departmental-level guidance is provided (e.g., AFIs, AFMANs, etc.), field activities may issue instructions to directly implement AFPDs and AF supplements to DoDDs." In this case, after AFRC/JA provided advice to the commander, the commander issued verbal instructions to directly implement AFI 36-2503, and AFI 36-2502, which would continue to be used as the procedural guidance to implement the Air Force Reserve Enlisted demotion and Promotion Policy. The Board agreed with the AFRC/AIK recommendation that the use of the former AFI 36- 2503 and AFI 36-2502 as the procedural guidance when implementing Air Force Reserve enlisted demotions and promotions was proper. The complete JA evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 5 Aug 2013, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). ________________________________________________________________ ? 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 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 this application in Executive Session on 25 Mar 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC-2013-02856: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 Jun 2013, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFRC/JA, dated 19 Jul 2013. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Aug 2013. 2 3