RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2007-02070
		INDEX CODE:  136.00
		COUNSEL:  NONE
		HEARING DESIRED:  NOT INDICATED

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be promoted to captain on a date prior to his discharge.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He should have been promoted prior to his discharge.

In support of his request, the applicant provided documentation associated with a Congressional inquiry.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Data extracted from the available military personnel records indicates the applicant was appointed a second lieutenant on 15 January 1943.  He was promoted to first lieutenant on 6 November 1943.  He was relieved from active duty on 17 April 1946 and from 18 April 1946 to 31 December 1953 he served in the Officer Reserve Corps, not on Extended Active Duty.  From 1 January 1954 to 31 March 1955, he was on the Indefinite Reserve Status (IRS) list and from 1 April 1955, he was transferred to the Inactive Status List Reserve Section (ISLRS).

On 6 August 1957, applicant was honorably discharged from all appointments in the Air Force as a first lieutenant.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPO recommends denial.  DPPO states the applicant has not provided any documentation to support his contention that he was promoted to the grade of captain.  There is nothing in his record to show he was recommended for promotion to captain.  All correspondence he received between 1946 and 1957 reflects his grade as first lieutenant.
All governing directives for promotions at that time were reviewed and it cannot be determined if the applicant would have been eligible for a terminal leave promotion because of insufficient documentation.  In December 1945, Separation Centers, Points and Bases were given the authority to process terminal leave promotions.  If the applicant was eligible and recommended for promotion either before or while on terminal leave, he would have been notified at that time.

This case should be dismissed as untimely.  The very reasons for having a statute of limitations, like that found in 10 U.S.C. 1552 and AFI 36-2603, include the fact that stale claims cannot be adequately addressed because the passage of time has resulted in the loss or destruction of the records/documentation needed to adjudicate the claim.  That is the case here.  The burden of proof rests with the applicant.  When the records/documentation no longer exist to verify his allegations, there is no basis upon which to grant relief.  Hence, it would not be in the interest of justice to waive the time limit and decide the case on its merits.  The application should therefore be denied as having failed to meet the requisite time requirement.

DPPPO’S complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 14 September 2007, the evaluation was forwarded to the applicant 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 an error or injustice.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, it is our opinion that relief is not warranted in this case.  The applicant's contentions are duly noted; however, other than his own assertions he has provided no evidence which sustains his burden of proof of either an error or injustice.  In view of the above and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of an 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-2007-02070 in Executive Session on 18 December 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 9 July 2007, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPPO, dated 22 August 2007.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 September 2007.
   Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 14 October 2007.
   Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 30 October 2007.