RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBERS:  BC-2003-01189
		INDEX CODE 102.02 131.00
	 	COUNSEL:  None

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  No

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be promoted and retired in the grade of colonel effective on his retirement date of 31 Aug 75.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He should have been promoted from 1st lieutenant (1LT) to captain when he was recalled from the Air Force Reserve (USAFR) in 1951. He recently learned from other retired officers who were called to active duty from the Reserve in 1951, as he was, that there was a directive sent to all active Reserve units stating all eligible Reserve officers were to be promoted or submitted for promotion prior to recall. He knows of no members of the 89th Troup Carrier Wing (89 TCW) receiving or being submitted for promotion. The directive was either overlooked or ignored by the staff busily processing and assigning the Reservists recalled. He was eligible for promotion at the time and was assigned to a captain’s position as flight commander. However, he was not promoted to captain until 1954. This delay affected all eligibility for subsequent promotions on active duty and resulted in his being three years older when finally considered for promotion. When he was first eligible for promotion to colonel, a colonel at Randolph AFB personnel reviewed his records and hinted his age might hinder his promotion despite his outstanding record. One more retired colonel will not have any effect on active duty promotions or seriously impact the Air Force budget. He’s almost 79 years old and thinks he deserves the title of colonel for his remaining years.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant was appointed a 2nd lieutenant (2Lt), Air Corps, on 23 May 44 and was reappointed to a 1LT on 9 Jan 46. He was released from active duty (demobilized) on 21 Feb 46.

He was mobilized again to active duty on 1 May 51 and executed a USAFR Oath of Office as a 1LT on that date. An indefinite USAFR appointment was tendered on 18 Dec 52. He was promoted to the temporary grade of captain on 15 Mar 54.

While still on active duty, he was offered a Regular USAF (RegAF) commission as a 1LT, which he accepted on 28 Mar 55. He continued to serve in his temporary grade of captain. He was promoted to the permanent grade of captain on 13 Jan 58.

The applicant was promoted to the permanent grade of lieutenant colonel (LTC) on 13 Jan 72.

The applicant’s performance reports from 18 Mar 52 through 31 Mar 75 are at Exhibit B and reflect that, out of all the reports, six were both “firewalled” in all performance factors and received the highest overall ratings.

The applicant retired in the grade of LTC on 1 Sep 75 with 27 years, 3 months and 24 days of active service.

HQ ARPC/DPB advised HQ AFPC/DPPPO via email on 24 Jun 03 that there was nothing in their regulations, message traffic, etc., contemporary with that time addressing promotion prior to going on active duty. ARPC advised that at the time the applicant was returned to active duty, the Reserve was transitioning from WWII/War Department promotions to the Reserve Officer Promotion Act (ROPA). All promotions were “suspended” for a while unless very specific requirements were met, such as having a fully paid billet in the Reserves. Further, if the officer was training for points only, there were no promotion opportunities.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ ARPC/DPB notes the letter sent to the applicant offering the RegAF commission was specifically addressed to “captain” offering the commission as a 1LT. HQ ARPC/DPB indicates they could not locate the promotion order that advanced him in grade to USAFR captain and advises that the requirements of the Air Force at the time of the USAF appointment dictated the grade in which the applicant could be appointed. His appointment as a RegAF officer in 1955 established his Air Force career. He accepted the USAF appointment, fully informed of his USAF grade and DOR. All future promotions occurred based on his time in grade, seniority and selection by promotion boards. Once the applicant accepted the USAF appointment, he no longer had competitive promotion standing in the USAFR. Denial is recommended.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

HQ AFPC/DPPPO asserts neither the applicant’s record nor his submission supports his contention that he should have been promoted to captain when he entered active duty in 1951 and, if he had been, he would have been promoted to colonel. Denial is recommended.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant asserts he never received a promotion order for captain in the USAFR. He was promoted to temporary captain on active duty on 15 Mar 54. He accepted a commission as a 1LT RegAF on 28 Mar 55 but continued serving as a temporary captain on active duty. Three years of earlier eligibility would most certainly affect succeeding future promotions. His appeal may be untimely but that is because he just recently became aware of the 1951 recall policy for active Reservists. A thorough examination of his performance reports, letters of commendation, wartime service and decorations, general officer indorsements, etc. will prove he was well qualified for promotion to colonel.

A complete copy of applicant’s response is at Exhibit F.

_________________________________________________________________

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 error or injustice. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that he should be retired in the grade of colonel. The applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we do not find these uncorroborated assertions, in and by themselves, sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force. The applicant was recalled to active duty in 1951 as a 1LT and he accepted the USAF appointment to the Regular Air Force in 1955 fully informed of his USAF grade and date of rank. Once he accepted the USAF appointment, he no longer had competitive promotion standing in the USAFR.. We therefore agree with the recommendations of the Air Force and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of having suffered either an error or an injustice. In view of the above and absent persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

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 10 September 2003 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-01189 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 1 Apr 03, w/atch.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ ARPC/DPB, dated 24 Apr 03.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPO, dated 30 Jul 03.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Aug 03.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, Applicant, dated 12 Aug 03.