RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02508
INDEX CODE: 131.00
APPLICANT COUNSEL: None
SSN HEARING DESIRED: No
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He receive promotion consideration to the grade of staff sergeant
(SSgt).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was not considered for promotion in 1965 to the grade of staff
sergeant. The failure of his not being considered by the promotion
board delayed his promotions to E5 and E6 and has denied him and his
family financial resources throughout his active duty career and
retirement.
Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant entered active duty in the Regular Air Force on 22 May
1956 as an airman basic.
He was promoted to staff sergeant on 1 June 1966 and technical
sergeant on 1 September 1971. He retired as a technical sergeant on
31 July 1976. He served a total of 20 years, 2 months and 10 days of
active service.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted
from the applicant's military records, are contained in the letter
prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force. Accordingly,
there is no need to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR STAFF EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPPWB states the applicant has not filed his claim within the 3-
year time limit. The applicant's request can be dismissed under the
equitable doctrine of laches, which denies relief to one who has
unreasonably and inexcusably delayed asserting a claim. Laches
consists of two elements: Inexcusable delay and prejudice to the Air
Force resulting therefrom. In the applicant's case, he waited 26
years after his discharge to file a request.
Promotion consideration during the timeframe in question was made at
the Major Command (MAJCOM), unless the MAJCOM delegated it to the
Wing, Group, or Squadron level. Promotion quotas were distributed to
the MAJCOMs based on the projected vacancies in each Career Field
Subdivision. Promotion boards selected individuals and the quotas
received determined the number that could be promoted. Based on the
vacancies and the needs of the Air Force some career fields had more
promotees than others. For promotion consideration for an E-5, the
member must have 18 months time-in-grade and a recommendation by the
commander.
The applicant has not provided any documentation in support of his
request. DPPPWB further states based on the lack of support or
documentation to the contrary, they have no reason to believe he was
not considered for promotion to SSgt during the timeframe in question.
They recommend the applicant's request be time barred or denied on
its merits (Exhibit C).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR STAFF EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 6
September 2002, for review and response. 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 material 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
and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. In
reviewing the applicant's records, we note his AF Forms 910 rendered
for periods 23 Feb 64 - 1 Feb 65 and 2 Feb 65 - 1 Feb 66, recommends
he be promoted to SSgt. Therefore, we are persuaded that in
accordance with the promotion policy in effect at the time, he was
considered for promotion in 1965, but not selected. In view of the
foregoing and 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 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 02-
02508 in Executive Session on 15 October 2002, under the provisions of
AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
Ms. Marcia J. Bachman, Member
Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 31 Jul 02.
Exhibit B. Available Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 27 Aug 02.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Sep 02.
RICHARD A. PETERSON
Panel Chair
DPPPWB further states the Air Force, after 56 years and limited records, cannot determine if the applicant should have been promoted earlier than he was. Therefore based on the rationale provided they recommend denying the applicant’s request (Exhibit D). He further states that he was promoted at the time of his discharge and the promotion was not affiliated with his flying years, the practice at that time was to promote each enlisted man one grade at time of discharge (Exhibit F).
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00212
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00212 INDEX CODE: 131.03 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 23 Jul 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be promoted to the grade of senior master sergeant (SMSgt) and/or chief master sergeant (CMSgt). Promotion boards selected individuals and the quotas received determined the number that...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00479
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The former military member’s separation documents and enlistment records indicate he enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 9 March 1948 with prior regular active duty Army service time of 2 years, 3 months and 10 days. He enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 15 September 1955 and served on active duty until 30 June 1968 at which time he was honorably relieved from active duty and retired in the grade of...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05725
The application has not been filed within the three-year time limitation imposed by Air Force Instruction 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records. Promotion boards selected individuals and the quotas received determined the number that could be promoted. Based on his DOR to Sgt, he would have been eligible for promotion consideration to the grade of SSgt beginning in 1969.
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04376
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04376 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His rank at the time of his discharge be corrected to reflect (E-7) master sergeant versus (E-6) technical sergeant. His DD Form 214 reflects he was honorably retired in the grade of technical sergeant (E-6) effective 30 Sep 67, after serving 20...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00403
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPPPWB states that a review of the applicant’s record reveals only one report was actually indorsed by MSgt B--- (28 January 1966 - 27 January 1967). To be considered for promotion to master sergeant, an individual must have 24 months time- in-grade, possess a 7-skill level Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC), and be recommended by the commander. They found nothing in his record to indicate an error or injustice was made that...
The applicant's delay in filing a claim has caused prejudice to the Air Force. DPPPWB further states the Air Force, after 56 years and limited records, cannot determine if the applicant should have been promoted. 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 and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02228
They also stated his request for promotion to TSgt should be denied based on merit as they found nothing in his record to indicate an error or injustice was made that prevented him from being promoted or considered for promotion. The DPPPWB complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 18 Aug 06, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01507
In support of his request, the applicant provided a statement in his own behalf. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant entered the active duty Air Force on 14 Jul 52 and was progressively promoted to the grade of staff sergeant (SSgt). The application has not been filed within the three-year time limitation imposed by AFI 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records, paragraph 3-5.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02269
In support of her appeal, the applicant has provided a personal statement, a Certificate of Death from the state of ---, a copy of a court document naming the deceased’s wife as executor of his estate, copies of orders awarding the Air Medal and an oak leaf cluster to the Air Medal to the deceased member, an obituary, a congressional request for information from C/M Jo Bonner of Alabama, a copy of the deceased members Enlisted Record and Report of Separation, a copy of his Army Qualification...