RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2020-02531

XXXXXXXXX	COUNSEL:  NONE

 	HEARING REQUESTED:  NO

APPLICANT’S REQUEST

His DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, be amended to reflect his grade as staff sergeant (E-5) rather than airman basic (E-1).

APPLICANT’S CONTENTIONS

He received a letter from the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council stating he would be retired as a staff sergeant.  He also has orders permanently retiring him from the temporary disability retirement list (TDRL) as a staff sergeant.  

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant is a retired Air Force staff sergeant (E-5).  He is credited with 18 years, 5 months, and 26 days of active service.

On 11 Aug 15, according to General Court Martial Order Number 3 dated 7 Dec 15, the applicant was sentenced to a reprimand, reduction in grade from technical sergeant/E-6 to E-1, and confinement for 9 months.

On 2 Oct 17, an Informal Physical Evaluation Board determined the applicant’s medical conditions rendered him unfit for continued military service and directed he be placed on TDRL with a compensable percentage for physical disability of 80 percent.

On 8 Nov 17, the Secretary of the Air Force Personnel Council conducted an enlisted grade determination and found that the applicant served satisfactorily in the higher grade of E-5.

On 28 Dec 17, the applicant was separated from active duty in the grade of E-1 and placed on TDRL in the grade of E-5, effective 29 Dec 17.  On 1 Apr 19, the applicant was removed from TDRL and retired in the grade of E-5.   

For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisory opinions at Exhibits C and D.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION

AFPC/DP2SSR recommends denying the application indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice with the DD Form 214 preparation.  In accordance with AFI 36-3202, Certificate of Discharge or Release from Active Duty and the DD Form 214 Personnel Serviced Delivery Guide, grade/rank will be “the active duty grade held at the time of the close-out of the DD Form 214.”  This refers to the physical rank the member was wearing on his uniform.  According to the military personnel database, the member’s grade at time of his separation and placement on TDRL was E-1; therefore, the DD Form 214 is correct as indicated.  In addition, the grade indicated on his retirement order is for pay purposes only and had no bearing on the grade held on the last day of active duty.  

The complete advisory opinion is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPFDC recommends denying the application.  Based on the documentation provided and analysis of the facts, there is no evidence of an error or injustice. The governing policy directs the DD Form 214 reflect the active duty grade held at the time of separation.  In addition, a new DD Form 214 is not issued when a member is removed from TDRL and permanently retired since time spent on TDRL is not active duty service time.  Rather, the new retirement order becomes a permanent part of the member’s military personnel record, and can be used with the DD Form 214 to indicate the final status.

The complete advisory opinion is at Exhibit D.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION

The Board sent a copy of the advisory opinion to the applicant on 12 Apr 21 for comment (Exhibit E), but has received no response.

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

1.  The application was timely filed.

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

3.  After reviewing all Exhibits, the Board concludes the applicant is not the victim of an error or injustice.  The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of AFPC/DP2SSR and AFPC/DPFDC and finds a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 was prepared in accordance with governing policy and accurately reflects the active duty grade held at separation.  Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

RECOMMENDATION

The Board recommends informing the applicant the evidence did not demonstrate material error or injustice, and the Board will reconsider the application only upon receipt of relevant evidence not already presented.

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-2020-02531 in Executive Session on 7 Jun 21:

, Panel Chair 
, Panel Member
, Panel Member

All members voted against correcting the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A:	Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 12 Aug 20.
Exhibit B:	Documentary evidence, including relevant excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C:	Advisory opinion AFPC/DP2SSR, revised and dated 12 Apr 21.
Exhibit D:	Advisory opinion AFPC/DPFDC, dated 7 Apr 21.
Exhibit E:	Notification of advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 12 Apr 21.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings, as required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.