RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-03618 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be granted supplemental promotion consideration to the grade of technical sergeant (E-6). ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: His Air Force Commendation Medal (AFCM) for the period 21 Feb 68 through 21 Dec 68 should have been considered for the contested promotion cycle. He was awarded the AFCM; however, it does not appear the decoration value of three points was calculated in his promotion score. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant’s military personnel records indicate that he enlisted in the Regular Air Force on 22 Jul 54. On 1 Dec 68, the applicant was promoted to the grade of staff sergeant (E-5). On 10 Jan 69, the applicant was awarded the AFCM for meritorious service during the period of 21 Feb 68 through 21 Dec 68. On 1 Feb 75, the applicant retired from the Air Force and was credited with 20 years, 6 months, and 9 days of total active service. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOE recommends the applicant’s request be time barred. In accordance with AFI 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records, the applicant did not file his application within the three-year statute of limitation. Based on the applicant’s date of rank to E-5, he would have been eligible for promotion consideration to E-6, beginning with cycle 72A6. He has waited more than 38 years after retirement to petition for consideration of promotion to E-6, and has not provided any reasonable or excusable purpose for his delay in asserting a claim. Promotion history files are only maintained for a period of 10 years; therefore, verification of his consideration for promotion to E-6 cannot be verified. Also, there is no way to ascertain if the addition of the AFCM would have rendered him a select during any particular cycle. Furthermore, the applicant has provided no supporting documentation (score notice) or information concerning which promotion cycle he missed promotion by three points to E-6. Ten years is generally considered an adequate period to resolve any promotion inquiries or concerns. As such, in this case, files and data regarding the applicant’s promotion process no longer exist, so if not time barred, his request should be denied based on the merits of the case. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOE 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 24 Feb 14 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D). ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2.   After careful consideration of the applicant’s request and the available evidence of record, we find the application untimely. The applicant did not file within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552 and Air Force Instruction 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records. The applicant has not shown a plausible reason for the delay in filing, and we are not persuaded the record raises issues of error or injustice which require resolution on the merits. Thus, we cannot conclude it would be in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to file in a timely manner. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The application was not timely filed and it would not be in the interest of justice to waive the untimeliness. It is the decision of the Board, therefore, to reject the application as untimely. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2013-03618 in Executive Session on 19 Jun 14, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 Jul 13, w/atch. Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 11 Oct 13. Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Feb 14. Panel Chair