.

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2017-01708

XXXXXXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  NONE
	
	HEARING:  NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His DD Form 256, Honorable Discharge Certificate, be corrected to reflect the grade of Staff Sergeant.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The Air Force has no rank of Sergeant, and after two years of reserve service after his discharge from the Air Force, his rank should probably be Staff Sergeant.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is a former Air Force Reserve Sergeant.  For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisory at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

ARPC/DPTT recommends denying the application.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 issued on 16 Jan 67 and the order discharging him from the Air Force Reserve on 15 Apr 69 state the applicant’s s rank as E-4 or "SGT.” At that time, an E-4 in the United States Air Force held the rank of Sergeant. Per the Air Force Historical Research Agency, the E-4 rank of Senior Airman was not created until 1975 and E-4s never held the rank of Staff Sergeant. Based upon all of the evidence available, the applicant was properly discharged as an E-4 holding the rank of Sergeant.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Board sent a copy of the Air Force evaluation to the applicant on 26 Sep 18 for comment (Exhibit D), but has received no response.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The application was not timely filed.

2.  The applicant exhausted all available avenues of non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.  After thoroughly reviewing all Exhibits, it is the Board’s opinion the applicant is not the victim of an error or injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of ARPC/DPTT and finds a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  The Board also notes the applicant did not file the application within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered, or should have been discovered, as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552, and Air Force Instruction 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR).  Moreover, the applicant has offered no plausible reason for the delay in filing the application.  The Board finds the application untimely and concludes it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The applicant be informed the application was not timely filed; it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay; and the application will only be reconsidered upon receipt of relevant evidence not already considered by the Board.

CERTIFICATION:

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2017-01708 in Executive Session on 8 Nov 18:

, Panel Chair
, Panel Member
, Panel Member

All members voted not to correct the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, dated 25 Mar 17.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion, ARPC/DPTT, dated 6 Aug 18.
Exhibit D:	Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 26 Sep 18.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9 for Docket Number BC-2017-01708.