RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  01-01993
            INDEX CODE:  131.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be retired in the grade of colonel.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

It took him approximately 7 years to be promoted from  the  grade  of  first
lieutenant to the grade of captain and 7½ years  to  be  promoted  from  the
grade of major to the grade of lieutenant  colonel.   He  believes  that  he
should have been retired in the grade of colonel.

He also contends that the Indorsing Official on  his  Officer  Effectiveness
Report (OER) rendered for the period 1 June 1958 through 31  May  1959,  did
not show him the OER or discuss it with him.

In support of his appeal, the applicant provided a  personal  statement  and
other documentation.

Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 19 January 1943 applicant entered active duty  as  a  second  lieutenant.
He was relieved from active duty on 14 April 1946,  with  a  terminal  leave
start date of 9 January 1946.  He was given a terminal  leave  promotion  to
the grade of captain effective 9 January 1946.   Terminal  leave  promotions
were without effect unless called back to active duty in the higher grade.



On 17 April 1946, applicant applied for active duty and on 27 June  1946  he
was temporarily appointed and commissioned in the Army of the United  States
(AUS) as a First Lieutenant.  He was advised by letter, if he  accepted  the
appointment it would vacate his present commission as a Captain  (AUS),  but
it would not affect his Reserve status.  On 19 July  1946,  he  returned  to
active duty as a first lieutenant with a date of  rank  (DOR)  of  20  March
1944.

On 31 October 1950,  applicant  was  promoted  to  the  temporary  grade  of
captain in the AFUS.

On 1 June 1952, applicant was promoted to the temporary grade of major.

Applicant received a permanent promotion in the Reserve of the Air Force  to
the grade of lieutenant colonel with a DOR of 25 June 1959.

The applicant retired from the Reserve of the Air Force on 31 January  1960,
in the grade of  lieutenant  colonel.   He  served  a  total  of  20  years,
1 month, and 1 day of total active military service.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPO recommended denial.  They indicate that they  believe  the  delay
in the applicant’s promotion to the  grade  of  captain  resulted  from  him
separating from active duty and agreeing to  return  to  active  duty  as  a
first lieutenant.  This was not uncommon at that time.  As for the delay  in
his promotion to lieutenant colonel, the  applicant  has  not  provided  any
evidence to show there was an error or  an  injustice  done.   Although  the
applicant has identified problems with his report closing out  31 May  1959,
this would not have affected his earlier boards.

The application may be dismissed under the  equitable  doctrine  of  laches,
which denies relief to one who has unreasonably and inexcusably  delayed  in
asserting claim.  Laches consist of  two  elements:  inexcusable  delay  and
prejudice to the Air Force resulting therefrom.  In  the  applicant’s  case,
he waited over 40 years.  There is  insufficient  documentation  to  support
the applicant’s contention he should have been  promoted  to  the  grade  of
colonel.  They have no  recommendation  should  the  board  elect  to  grant
relief to the applicant over their objection.

The Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DPPP indicates that the applicant  did  not  make  a  specific  request
regarding his Officer  Effectiveness  Report  (OER)  closing  31  May  1959;
however, he objects to the Indorsing Official downgrading Section III,  Item
4, and comments in Section VII, “This has been  discussed  with  [applicant]
on several occasions with slight improvement after each discussion.”

There is no record of the applicant filing an appeal  under  the  provisions
of AFI 36-2401, Correcting Officer and Enlisted Evaluation Reports.

Although the applicant contends the report was not discussed  with  him,  he
further states, “While he might have, I do not recall  [Indorsing  Official]
discussing this matter with me at any time.”

Since this report is 42  years  old,  they  do  not  believe  the  applicant
suffered an injustice since he first reviewed the report in  September  2000
(41 years after the closeout date).  Additionally, there was no  requirement
to show the report to the applicant or  discuss  the  ratings  and  comments
before it was filed in his record.  The applicant has not proven the  report
is an injustice.

The Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant reviewed the evaluations and states that he is at  a  loss  to
understand why he remained a first lieutenant for approximately seven  years
before being promoted to the grade of captain when it should  have  been  18
months.  He held the grade of captain for 20 months prior to being  promoted
to the grade of  major.   He  indicates  that  this  is  quite  a  contrast,
approximately seven years to captain versus 20 months to major.

Applicant’s response, with attachments, is at Exhibit F.

The applicant provided additional documentation that is at Exhibit G.

_________________________________________________________________

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  probable  error  or  injustice.   We  took  notice   of   the
applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case;  however,
we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air  Force  and  adopt
their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant  has  not
been the victim of an error or injustice.   Therefore,  in  the  absence  of
evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling 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 probable 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  AFBCMR  Docket  Number   01-
01993 in Executive Session on 21 March 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

                  Mr. Joseph A. Roj, Panel Chair
                  Mr. Laurence M. Groner, Member
                  Mr. William H. Anderson, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 2 July 2001, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 24 January 2002.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPP, dated 25 January 2002.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 February 2002.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 7 February 20002 w/atchs.
   Exhibit G.  Letter, Applicant, dated 11 February 2002.




                                JOSEPH A. ROJ
                                Panel Chair