RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00142 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His rank be changed from “buck sergeant” to technical sergeant (E-6). _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He completed all required training as a radio operator and should have been promoted to the grade of technical sergeant. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant was a member of the Army Air Corps from 28 May 1943 to 5 December 1945 and was discharged in the grade of sergeant. The applicant’s service records are at Exhibit B. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommends denial and states, in part, the applicant’s request should be denied based on the untimeliness of the application, 67 years after discharge. The applicant’s request may also be dismissed under the equitable doctrine of laches which denies relief to one who has unreasonably and inexcusably delayed asserting a claim. Furthermore, the applicant has not provided documentation to substantiate his commanders and supervisors had recommended him for promotion advancement. Due to the extremely limited records and the passage of time, DPSOE states that it is impossible for them to determine if promotion to a higher grade was appropriate. Therefore, in the absence of documentation to the contrary, DPSOE assumes he was discharged in t he proper grade. The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He completed qualifications for bombardier training and would have been a commissioned officer if training was not delayed. At the time he was unaware he could challenge his grade and requests fair consideration based on merits and accomplishments. The applicant’s complete response is at 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. After a thorough review of the available evidence and the applicant’s complete submission, we find no evidence which would persuade us that the applicant’s service records should be corrected to show he was promoted to any grade higher than that reflected in his military records. The applicant’s personal sacrifice and unselfish service to his country is noted and our decision in no way lessens our regard for his service; however, without documentation to substantiate his request, we find no 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; 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-2013-00142 in Executive Session on 17 September 2013 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 Oct 2012, w/atchs. Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Military Service Records. Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 15 Feb 2013. Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant’s Response, dated 19 Mar 2013. Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Mar 2013. 1 2