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). 

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He spent more than 20 years in the military service with combat in Korea in 1950.  He lost promotion opportunities because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time through organizations being disbanded, transfers, etc.  He would be a SMSgt or CMSgt if he had been in the right place at the right time for promotion.  Prisoners of War (POWs) get promoted after their release because they missed promotion opportunities.  He doesn’t ask for pay, although that would have helped his family.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant enlisted in the US Marine Corps on 20 Jul 46, reenlisted on 20 Jul 50, was promoted to the grade of staff sergeant (SSgt) with a date of rank (DOR) of 1 Mar 52, and was honorably discharged in the grade of SSgt for expiration of enlistment term on 19 Jul 56, after 11 years and 16 days of active service.

The applicant entered active duty in the Air Force as a SSgt on, and with a DOR of, 23 Jul 56.  He was promoted to technical sergeant (TSgt) effective 1 Dec 63, and was honorably retired in that grade on 30 Sep 65 after 20 years, 2 months and 24 days of active service.  The available military personnel records reflect that the highest grade held by the applicant was TSgt.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPPWB recommends denial and notes the applicant waited more than 40 years to submit his appeal.  Promotions during this timeframe were made at the Major Command (MAJCOM), unless delegated to the Wing, Group, or Squadron levels.  HQ USAF distributed promotion quotas to the MAJCOMs based on projected vacancies within each Career Field Subdivision.  Promotion boards selected individuals and the quotas received determined the number that could be promoted.  Some career fields received more promotions than others based on vacancies and the needs of the Air Force.  The applicant was never promoted to the grade of master sergeant (MSgt), which is a prerequisite for consideration to SMSgt.  To be considered for promotion to MSgt during the timeframe in question, an individual must have had 24 months time-in-grade (TIG), possessed a 7-skill level Air Force Specialty Code (AFSC), and been recommended by the commander.  These were the minimum eligibility requirements to be considered but they in no way ensured or guaranteed promotion.  After a thorough review of the applicant’s records, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB found no documentation (nomination list or orders) promoting him to the grade of MSgt  Therefore, the author believes the supervisors and commanding officers at the time were in a better position to evaluate the applicant’s potential and eligibility for promotion and recommends denial.

A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 17 Feb 06 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D).  As of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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 he should be promoted beyond the grade of TSgt, the highest grade held and in which he was retired, according to his military records.  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 has not shown to our satisfaction that he is eligible for promotion beyond the grade of TSgt.  Further, based on the presumption of regularity in the conduct of government affairs, and without evidence to the contrary, we must assume his supervisors and commanding officers at the time properly evaluated his potential and eligibility for promotion.  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 not sustained his burden of having suffered either an error or an injustice.  In view of the above, 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 1 June 2006 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence relating to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2006-00212 was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 14 Jan 06, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPPWB, dated 13 Feb 06.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Feb 06.