RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-01620
		INDEX CODE:  131.00
		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His rank at the time of his discharge be changed to Sergeant Major.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was denied the proper chance to advance as Head of the Reproduction Department, and he should have been promoted to Major.  He was the assistant Sergeant Major.

In support of the application, the applicant submits a his Separation Qualification Record, a letter from the Graphic Communications International Union (GCIU) president, his letter to the GCIU president, a letter from the National Personnel Records Center, and the original and copy of a letter from the Army Board of Correction of Military Records.  The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

It appears that the former member’s service records were damaged by fire in 1973 at the National Personnel Records Center, St. Louis, MO.  As a result, the following is the only known information pertaining to the applicant’s service and was extracted from the partially reconstructed record and from documents provided by the applicant.

On 20 May 1941, the applicant enlisted in the Air Corps at the age of 26.  He was honorably discharged on 23 November 1945.  He had served four years, six months, and four days of active service. 

On 8 July 1942, the applicant applied for a commission to the Army Air Forces Administrative Officers Candidate School.  On 18 August 1942, the approving authority disapproved the applicant’s request.

In 1975, applicant applied to the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) requesting he be duly charged, and tried by jury or military court martial for any reason that caused him to be denied his commission as an officer in 1942, or that he be compensated for 35 years of frustration and mental anguish.  The Board denied his application on 12 November 1976 (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPPWB stated there was insufficient documentation and justification to warrant an evaluation of the applicant’s contentions.  DPPPWB notes it is unclear as to what the applicant is requesting.  DPPPWB assumes the applicant is requesting promotion to Sergeant Major, and as a matter of information adds the rank of Sergeant Major did not come into effect until 1 June 1958 (almost 13 years after the applicant was discharged).

DPPPWB’s evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment on 10 June 2004.  As of this date, this office has received no response (Exhibit E).

_________________________________________________________________

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; 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 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 this application in Executive Session on 16 November 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered for AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2004-01620:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 11 Aug 03 w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRS, dated 16 Apr 04.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dtd 16 Dec 76.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Jun 04.