RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01196
		INDEX CODE:  131.03

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His deceased father be promoted to Master Sergeant (MSgt/E-7).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

After many recommendations, his father was never promoted to MSgt.  The applicant, recently going over some old papers that belonged to his father, came across some evaluations that showed that his father had been placed at the top of his field.  He noted also that his father had been recommended for promotion to MSgt at least 3 years prior to his retirement.  Applicant notes that his father had received an Outstanding Unit Award twice.  And, that upon retirement, his father received the Military Merit Award.  He believes the Air Force could have done one more thing for his father, and that was to promote him to MSgt.

In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided a copy of a letter he wrote to the President, copies of his father’s birth and death certificates, a copy of a letter of appreciation from President Johnson to the XXth Military Airlift Wing commander, wherein the President asks that a copy be placed into each member of the XXth’s record, and several other documents from his father’s military record.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The deceased member enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 21 June 1949.  He attained the rank of Technical Sergeant (TSgt/E6) with a date of rank of 1 June 1965.  He applied for voluntary retirement with 20 years or more active service and was retired effective 31 July 1969.  He had served 20 years, 1 month, and 10 days.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPPWB reviewed this application and recommended that short of the Board denying the case on its merits, DPPPWB recommends applicant’s request be time barred.  DPPPWB noted the untimeliness of the application.  During the time frame between 1949 and 1969, the minimum qualifications for promotion to MSgt were 2 years time in grade, a 7-skill level in his Air Force Specialty, and to be recommended by ones commander.  DPPPWB notes that these were minimum requirements for promotion and in no way a guarantee that one would be promoted.  Finally, DPPPWB finds nothing in the former member’s record to indicate an error or injustice was made that prevented the former member’s promotion to MSgt.

DPPPWB’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 23 May 2003 for review and comment within 30 days.  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 error or injustice.  We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case and find that the applicant’s father served his country honorably for over 20 years and was recognized appropriately throughout his career.  However, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the deceased member 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 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 BC-2003-01196 in Executive Session on 5 August 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 28 Apr 03, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit B.  Decedent's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 2 May 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 May 03.