RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-00351 COUNSEL: NONE (APPLICANT) HEARING DESIRED: NO (POWER OF ATTORNEY) APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. His records be corrected to show he was promoted to Captain (O3) before 1944 and promoted to Major before 1947. 2. His WD AGO Form 100, Separation Qualification Record, be amended in Section 12. Military Occupational Specialty to add Pilot, multi-engine, Property Officer, Engineering Officer, and Conversation Officer. 3. He was retired in the grade of Colonel (O6) with retroactive benefits and back pay. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He should have been promoted earlier based on him accepting and successfully performing and overseeing commands based on chain of command unit size. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOO recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. There is no evidence to support the applicant should have been promoted earlier than he was recommended. The applicant entered active duty as a second lieutenant (2Lt) with a date of rank (DOR) 7 Mar 42. He was recommended for promotion to Captain on 31 Aug 43 and pinned on 23 Oct 44. On 15 Jul 47, he was promoted to Major per the War Department Circular 140, which governed Terminal Leave promotions. On 13 Sep 47, he was released from active duty by reason of physical disability. Under Army Regulation (AR) 605-12, Temporary Promotions in the Army of the United States, a recommendation for promotion of an officer will be initiated unless a position vacancy exists and the officer has served the maximum period in the next lower grade. The officer must be recommended for promotion by their commander. Although, the applicant may have met the time-in-grade (TIG) requirements to pin-on at an earlier date, he was not recommended any earlier for promotion to lieutenant or captain, nor is there any evidence he was recommended for promotion to major by his commander. Furthermore, the primary objective for promotion was to invest in an individual with a grade that held a position with a degree of authority commensurate with the demands of the position he is to occupy. While the applicant may have held numerous positons of leadership, there is no evidence he was placed in a command. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOO evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On behalf of his father, the applicant’s son states he believes his father’s promotions should have commenced as early as March 1942. His father held positions with more than 500 people under his direction. At one point he took charge of several programs along with overseeing 900 people. It appears overseeing that many people may have exceeded that of a battalion. Typically the rank of someone overseeing a command of this size was a lieutenant colonel or colonel. The applicant’s son further states that his father believes field promotions reduced the opportunity for promoting those stateside supporting the war effort. The applicant’s son’s complete response, with attachments, 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. While the applicant claims a date of discovery of less than three years ago, in our view, the reasonable date of discovery of the alleged error or injustice was more than three years ago. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission, to include his son’s rebuttal response, in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. After reviewing the documentation provided and the applicant’s military personnel records, there was no evidence showing he was not properly advanced for promotion to captain or major. Furthermore, there was no evidence to show he qualified or was recommended for promotion to lieutenant colonel or colonel. Lastly, there was no evidence of an error injustice regarding the applicant’s WD AGO Form 100, Separation Qualification Record. While we are not unmindful or unappreciative of the applicant’s service to our Nation, in the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2015-00351 in Executive Session on 15 Oct 15, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-00351 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Feb 15, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOO, dated 29 Apr 15. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Jun 15.